Chapter 7 Public Facilities

Water And The People Of Chennai

Observing the availability of **water** in different areas of Chennai reveals stark disparities based on socio-economic status.

In affluent areas like **Anna Nagar**, senior government officials have abundant water supply for household use, including maintaining lawns. If the regular supply is insufficient, they can easily arrange for water tankers through personal contacts with the municipal water board.

Residents in middle-class areas like **Mylapore** face water shortages, receiving municipal water only on alternate days. They supplement their needs with private borewells, but the water is often brackish (salty) and only suitable for toilets and washing. For other purposes, they must **purchase water from tankers**, incurring significant monthly expenses (e.g., $\textsf{₹}$500-600). Drinking water often requires installing home purification systems or buying bottled water.

For those living on rent in areas like **Madipakkam**, water supply is even less frequent, sometimes only once in four days, making it difficult to sustain a family there. Drinking water is purchased in bottles.

In slums like **Saidapet**, domestic workers live in hutments with minimal facilities. A large number of households share a single tap connected to a borewell, which provides water for limited periods twice a day (e.g., 20 minutes). Families are restricted in the amount of water they can collect (e.g., maximum three buckets). This water is used for all purposes, including drinking and washing. During summer, the supply dwindles, intensifying competition and hardship. Waiting long hours for water tankers is common.

These accounts highlight a significant **water shortage** issue in Chennai, but the problem is not uniform. Access to adequate and safe water varies greatly depending on where people live and their ability to afford private alternatives.

The illustrations depict the contrast in water access across different localities in Chennai. Anna Nagar shows lushness enabled by ample water, while Saidapet's common tap and long queues signify scarcity and hardship. Mylapore suggests reliance on borewells and tankers due to infrequent municipal supply, and Madipakkam indicates similar challenges with less frequent water access.

Water As Part Of The Fundamental Right To Life

**Water** is absolutely fundamental for survival and maintaining good health. Access to safe drinking water is crucial for preventing numerous **water-related diseases** like diarrhoea, dysentery, and cholera, which cause significant fatalities in India, particularly among young children.

Recognising its importance, the **Constitution of India** includes the **right to water** as a component of the **Right to Life**, enshrined under **Article 21**. This constitutional recognition means that every individual in India, regardless of their economic status (rich or poor), has the right to receive a sufficient quantity of water to meet their daily needs at a price they can afford. This implies the goal of **universal access to water** for all citizens.

Indian courts have reinforced this constitutional position. Both the High Courts and the Supreme Court have, in various cases, affirmed that the right to safe drinking water is a **Fundamental Right**. For example, in 2007, the Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld this right while hearing a case concerning the contamination of drinking water in a village due to industrial discharge. The court directed the district administration to ensure the supply of a minimum quantity of water (25 litres) to each person in the affected village.

The United Nations also recognises a similar right, stating that the right to water entitles everyone to "sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic use" (2002). This aligns with the principle embedded in the Indian Constitution.

Public Facilities

**Public facilities** are essential services and amenities that need to be provided for everyone in society to meet their basic needs and ensure a decent quality of life. Like water, other examples of public facilities include healthcare, sanitation, electricity, public transport, schools, and colleges.

A key characteristic of a public facility is that once it is established, its **benefits are shared by many people**. For instance, a school benefits numerous children seeking education, while an electricity supply benefits farmers (for irrigation pumps), small businesses, students (for studying), and households for various uses. Public transport systems allow large numbers of people to commute, and healthcare facilities serve the health needs of the community.

This photo shows a child receiving a polio vaccination. This is an example of public healthcare, a vital public facility provided by the government to protect the health of the entire population and eradicate preventable diseases.

The Indian Constitution also guarantees the **Right to Education** for children aged 6-14 years. Ensuring that schooling facilities are equally accessible and of comparable quality for all children is an important aspect of fulfilling this right, although challenges in achieving equity in education persist.

The provision of adequate public facilities is crucial for any modern society to ensure that people's basic needs for survival and a decent life are met. Since the **Right to Life** guaranteed by the Constitution applies to everyone, the responsibility for providing these essential public facilities must logically fall upon the **government**.

The Government’s Role

Given the critical importance of public facilities for meeting basic needs and upholding the Right to Life, the government is the entity best suited, and indeed obligated, to ensure their widespread provision. But why is this responsibility primarily the government's and not left entirely to private entities?

Private companies typically operate with the main objective of **making profit**. While some public facilities, like schools or hospitals, might be profitable and thus attract private investment (leading to the presence of private schools and hospitals, often in urban areas), many others are not. For example, activities like maintaining public drains or running public health campaigns (like anti-malaria drives) offer no direct financial profit, making them unattractive for private companies.

Furthermore, even when private companies *do* provide services resembling public facilities (e.g., water supplied by tankers or bottled water), they do so at a **price**. This market-based approach means that the facility is available only to those who can **afford to pay for it**. If access to essential public facilities is solely determined by a person's ability to pay, a large segment of the population who cannot afford the market prices will be deprived of these services. This would prevent them from living a decent life, directly contradicting the universal nature of the Right to Life guaranteed by the Constitution.

Therefore, to ensure that public facilities, which relate to fundamental basic needs, are available to **everyone** regardless of their income, the responsibility must be borne by the government. The government operates not for profit but for the welfare of all citizens.

A dialogue between Amu and Kumar highlights different perspectives on who deserves access to public facilities. Kumar initially suggests they are only for tax-paying residents in 'proper houses', excluding slum dwellers. Amu counters that slum dwellers are also citizens with rights and that the Constitution recognises public facilities as part of the Right to Life, which the government must protect for everyone to ensure a decent life. Amu's viewpoint aligns with the constitutional mandate for equitable access.

Where Does The Government Get Money For Public Facilities?

Providing public facilities requires significant financial resources. The government obtains the money needed for these facilities primarily through **taxes collected from the people**. The government is empowered by the Constitution to collect these taxes and allocate them for public welfare programmes, including the provision of public facilities.

The government's financial plans are outlined annually in the **government budget**, presented in Parliament. This budget details past expenditures and future spending plans, as well as the sources of revenue.

For services like water supply, the government incurs costs related to pumping, transportation, distribution (laying pipes), purification, and wastewater collection and treatment. These expenses are covered partly by **tax revenue** and partly by charging a **price for the water**. The price for basic consumption is typically set at an **affordable level** to ensure that most people can access a minimum amount of water for their daily needs.

This pie chart illustrates how each rupee of the Central Government's expenditure is allocated across various sectors like interest payments, states' share of taxes, defence, subsidies, pensions, and schemes. This visually represents where the government spends the money it collects, including funds potentially directed towards public facilities.

This pie chart shows the sources from which the Central Government generates its revenue, including borrowings, GST, income tax, corporation tax, excise duties, customs, and non-tax receipts. This illustrates where the money comes from that is used to finance public facilities and other government functions.

Public transport systems like the Mumbai suburban railway are crucial for many working people in cities, providing access to employment. While public bus systems in many cities struggle to keep up with demand due to rapid urbanisation, ambitious projects like metro rail aim to improve public transport, although at significant costs. Debates arise about prioritising investment between modern, expensive systems and upgrading existing public bus networks to serve a wider population.

Water Supply To Chennai: Is It Available To All?

While the principle is that public facilities like water should be universally available, the reality in places like Chennai reveals significant challenges and inequalities in provision.

Water supply in Chennai is characterised by severe **shortages**. The municipal water supply on average meets only about **half the city's needs**. The distribution is also uneven, with areas closer to water storage points receiving more regular and sufficient supply, while colonies located farther away experience greater shortages.

The impact of these water shortages is disproportionately borne by the **poor**, who have limited means to cope. The **middle class** is generally better equipped to manage shortages through various private solutions: digging borewells, purchasing water from private tankers, and buying bottled water for drinking. This disparity means that access to water is heavily influenced by economic capacity.

Beyond just the quantity, access to **'safe' drinking water** is also unequal and depends on what one can afford. The wealthy benefit from a booming market in bottled water and water purifiers, ensuring they have access to safe water. The poor, lacking the financial means, are often left without access to safe drinking water, relying on potentially contaminated sources.

This reality starkly contrasts with the constitutional goal of **universal access to 'sufficient and safe' water**. It appears that in practice, having money is often a prerequisite for having reliable access to sufficient and safe water, undermining the right to water for the less affluent population.

In **rural areas**, water is needed for both domestic human use and for livestock. Sources include wells, handpumps, ponds, and sometimes overhead tanks. Many of these sources are privately owned. Compared to urban areas, the shortage of **public water supply** in rural areas is often even more pronounced.

The shortage of municipal water has created lucrative opportunities for **private companies**. Many companies profit by buying water from areas outside cities, often from farmers in nearby towns and villages. In Chennai, a large fleet of water tankers transports water bought from surrounding areas, including Mamandur, Palur, and Karungizhi. Water dealers pay farmers in advance for the right to extract groundwater from their land.

This practice not only diverts water away from agriculture but also depletes the **drinking water supplies of the villagers**. Groundwater levels in these source towns and villages have fallen drastically as a direct consequence of this commercial extraction, highlighting an unsustainable and exploitative practice driven by urban water demands.

In Search Of Alternatives

The situation of water shortages and crises, particularly during summer, is not limited to Chennai but is a common problem in many other cities across India. The gap between municipal water supply and demand is increasingly being filled by the growth of **private companies selling water for profit**.

Some argue that since government water departments often face shortages and financial losses, allowing private companies to take over water supply would be more efficient and effective. However, this perspective should be examined critically.

Consider the following facts regarding water supply:

1. Globally, **public water supply is the norm**; very few countries rely on private companies for universal water provision.
2. There are successful examples worldwide where **public water supply systems have achieved universal access**, ensuring water for all citizens (e.g., Porto Alegre in Brazil, where the municipal water department provides universal access to safe water at affordable rates, contributing to lower infant mortality).
3. In instances where water supply responsibility was transferred to private companies, there have often been **steep increases in water prices**, making it unaffordable for many and leading to public protests and even riots (e.g., Bolivia), forcing governments to reclaim control.
4. Even within India, there are cases of **successful government water departments**, such as in Mumbai, which covers its expenses through water charges, and Hyderabad, which has improved coverage and revenue collection.

The Chennai water department itself has taken initiatives like **rainwater harvesting** to increase groundwater levels and uses private companies for transporting and distributing water on a contractual basis, but the government department still sets the rates and manages the overall operation.

These facts suggest that while government water departments may face challenges, withdrawing government responsibility and handing it over entirely to private companies is not necessarily the right step, as it could lead to increased prices and reduced access for the poor. Alternatives might involve improving the efficiency and management of public water departments and ensuring equitable distribution, rather than abandoning the government's role.

Extending Sanitation Facilities

Beyond safe drinking water, access to proper **sanitation facilities** is equally vital for preventing water-borne diseases and ensuring public health. However, sanitation coverage in India has traditionally been even lower than water access.

According to 2011 data, while 87% of Indian households had access to drinking water, only about **53% had access to sanitation facilities** (toilets within their residence premises). Similar to water, the lack of access to sanitation disproportionately affects the **poor**, in both rural and urban areas.

Organisations like **Sulabh**, a non-government organisation (NGO), have worked for decades to improve sanitation, particularly for low-income and low-caste communities who were historically denied such facilities. Sulabh has constructed thousands of community toilet blocks and household toilets, providing sanitation access to millions. These facilities are often used by poor working-class individuals.

Sulabh collaborates with municipalities and local authorities, receiving government funds and land for construction. Maintenance costs are sometimes covered by charging a small user fee (e.g., $\textsf{₹}$2 in cities). This model involves a partnership between an NGO and the government to address sanitation needs.

Lack of access to proper sanitation facilities significantly impacts people's lives, particularly health and dignity. Practicing open defecation increases the risk of spreading water-borne diseases, contaminating the environment. It also affects privacy and safety, especially for women and girls, who are often more vulnerable when using open spaces for sanitation.

Mahatma Gandhi's recounting of untouchables' grievances in 1896, where they expressed astonishment at the idea of having latrines, highlights the historical denial of basic sanitation and dignity to certain communities, who were forced to use open spaces and then perform tasks related to cleaning waste, perpetuating the practice of untouchability.

Conclusion

Public facilities are essential for meeting the basic needs of the population. The Indian Constitution recognises fundamental rights like the right to water, health, and education as integral parts of the **Right to Life**. Consequently, a primary responsibility of the government in a democratic state is to ensure the provision of adequate public facilities for all its citizens.

However, achieving this goal has been challenging in India. There are significant **shortages in the supply** of many public facilities, and there is considerable **inequality in their distribution**. Urban areas, particularly wealthy localities in metros and large cities, tend to be better serviced than towns and villages or poorer localities within cities.

Suggesting that private companies should take over these facilities may not be the optimal solution. While private entities can assist in certain aspects (like transportation or construction), relying solely on profit-driven entities could exacerbate inequalities, making essential services unaffordable for the poor.

Any approach to improving public facilities must be grounded in the fundamental principle that **every citizen has a right to these services**, and they should be provided in an **equitable manner**, ensuring access, affordability, and quality for all, regardless of their socio-economic background.

Progress in public facilities continues. For instance, rural household electrification in India stood at 96% in 2022 (NFHS-5), indicating significant improvement in accessing electricity in rural areas.

Reflecting on the state of public facilities like Water, Electricity, Roads, and Public Transport in one's own area reveals varying levels of availability and quality. There is often scope for improvement in areas like consistency of water supply, reliability of electricity, maintenance of roads, or expansion of public transport networks. Improving these requires sustained government investment, better infrastructure management, and equitable distribution strategies to ensure all residents benefit.