The Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry on the Israeli Water Sector Headed by MK David Magen REPORT Jerusalem, June 2002 2 Table of Contents Explanation by the translator 1. Introduction by the Chairman of the Committee 2. The establishment of the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry on the Israeli Water Sector 2.1. The background to the establishment for the Committee 2.2. The resolution establishing the Committee 2.3. The Committee's terms of reference 2.4. The Committee's work 3. Summing up and conclusions 4. The Committee's recommendations 5. The state of the Israeli water sector 5.1. The supply of water 5.2. The demand for water 5.3. Over-pumping 6. The legal situation 6.1. Water legislation 6.2. The basic principles of the Water Law 6.3. The Water Commission 6.4. The shortcomings of the existing legislation 7. The background to the crisis in the Israeli water sector 7.1. General 7.2. The historical background of the crisis in the Israeli water sector 7.2.1. The first period - the years 1948-1964 7.2.2. The second period - the years 1965-1985 7.2.3. The third period - the years 1986-2000 7.2.4. The beginning of the fourth period - starting 2001 7.3. The organizational structure, and the decision making process 7.3.1. The Ministries dealing with the water issue 7.3.2. Additional bodies active in the water sector 7.3.3. Government resolutions 7.3.4. The reports of the State Comptroller and Knesset decisions 7.3.5. Master plans and experts’ reports 7.3.6. The process of determining policy and decision making 3 7.4. Agriculture and water 8. A master plan for the water sector 9. An analysis of specific problems and recommendations 9.1. Immediate steps to be taken by the Government 9.1.1. Emergency Regulations 9.1.2. The establishment of a ministerial committee for natural resources, agriculture and the environment 9.2. Dealing with institutional and organizational problems 9.2.1. Strengthening the Water Commission and the Water Commissioner 9.2.2. The establishment of an independent water authority, after the water sector is stabilized 9.2.3. Establishing a ministerial hierarchy regarding treatment of the water sector 9.2.4. Structural changes in the Water Council 9.2.5. Ending the crisis in “Mekorot” 9.2.6. The question of privatizing the water sector 9.3. Legislation and the legal sphere 9.3.1. Uniting the water laws while laying down a spatial policy 9.3.2. Adapting the legislation to the changing reality 9.3.3. Simplifying the bureaucratic procedures 9.3.4. Enforcement policy 9.4. Saving water 9.4.1. The allocation of water - quotas 9.4.2. Saving water in the various sectors 9.5. The pricing of water 9.6. The creation of new sources of water 9.6.1. Desalination of seawater 9.6.2. Desalination of brackish water 9.6.3. The treatment of sewage - effluents 9.6.4. Importing water from Turkey 9.7. Water reservoirs 9.7.1. Natural reservoirs 9.7.2. Artificial reservoirs 9.8. The quality of water 9.9. Water for nature 9.10. Data and data bases 9.11. Academia and research 4 INTRODUCTION BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE When the Knesset set up the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry on the Israeli Water Sector on June 27, 2001, it assigned to it, in addition to its important tasks, two more matters: 1. To determine who is responsible for the crisis; 2. To recommend urgent steps and emergency measures (within the framework of an interim report). On the first matter we establish clearly and firmly, who is responsible for the serious failures that were uncovered, but preferred not to mention names. All along the way, out of a sense of heavy responsibility, we concentrated on the effort to find practical solutions to the great distress. We did not seek “blood” - we sought water! Soon after the first set of deliberations, we gave up the idea of publishing an interim report, due to a welcome problem: the activities of the Committee of Inquiry resulted, knowingly or unknowingly, in an acceleration of the Government's work concerning emergency measures to confront the crisis in the water sector. The strenuous activity of Minister for National Infrastructures Avigdor Lieberman, and of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, as Chairman of the Ministerial Committee for Social and Economic Affairs, led to the establishment of an inter- ministerial emergency team, and to corresponding and parallel decisions to the emergency measures discussed in the deliberations of the Committee. As aforesaid, this welcome activity led, several weeks ago, to a Government plan the main aspects of which are: 1. Government resolution No. 1682 (SE/32) of April 4, 2002, which speaks of: (a) Increasing the volume of desalination in Ashkelon to 100 million Cu.M per annum; (b) Terminating the procedures for selecting the desalination concessionaires for the small plants up to 65 million Cu.M per annum, so that production in them will begin by the end of 2004; 5 (c) Pushing forward the construction of desalination plants in the Hadera area with a capacity of 100 million Cu.M, so that they would also start producing by the end of 2004; (d) Formulating a plan to produce an additional quantity of desalinated water, at a capacity of 90 million Cu.M by February 2005; (e) Formulating, as soon as possible, an agreement to import from Turkey 50-100 million Cu.M of water per annum. This resolution lays down that the total quantity of desalinated water will reach approximately 400 million Cu.M per annum. 2. Government resolution No. 1740/4 of April 28, 2002, that approves the reform in water prices for agriculture, which was formulated by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. With a single sweep of a sickle, we sowed an additional crop: a master plan for the development of the water sector, until the year 2004, that was approved by the Minister for National Infrastructures on April 23, 2002. However, we were not satisfied with this, and demanded the formulation of a plan for the year 2040! Not all the evidence that we heard, or studies and articles that we read, manifest themselves in the Report. For example, the forecasts of some of the best scientists in the spheres of the environment, climate, biology and ecology, who warn against the process of increasing desertification in the Mediterranean basin, and particularly rapidly in our region - remained in the background. We find both the mention and the harsh results important: the depletion of water sources and the growing consumption thereof. The need to stop, at some point, pumping water from the Sea of Galilee (which loses 267 million Cu.M of water every year just through evaporation!), and to plan its future rehabilitation (stopping completely the pumping of water for at least one year). Matters concerning and connected with political considerations, are partially mentioned in the Report (importing water from Turkey, supplying water to Jordan, supplying water to the Palestinian Authority, cooperation with the Palestinian Authority for the preservation of the Mountain Aquifer, the use of desalinated seawater to increase regional cooperation) - the political issue is not within the frame of reference of the Committee. The Committee of Inquiry was careful, in the course of formulating its summations, conclusions and recommendations (chapters 3 and 4 in the Report) to present only challenges 6 that may be realized. Regarding issues that raised disputes between the authorities, we took clear positions, as, for example: The establishment of an independent, professional water authority; 1. Agriculture - we emphasize the importance of its existence as a national and strategic value; 2. “Mekorot” - we favor the company being strengthened, the removal of bureaucratic blockages, and exhausting its potential. Our recommended that Emergency Regulation be issued in light of the emergency situation, was formulated following prolonged exertions. The crisis is so deep, and the shortage in the interim period will be so grave, that the ability “to maintain the provision and the vital services” (in the words of Basic Law: the Government, regarding Emergency Regulations) is placed in great doubt. The goal of the Regulations is to help the Government overcome the difficulties and the bureaucratic blockages. We hope that all the responsible factors, will act together to implement the recommendations, and especially: 1. The establishment of an independent, professional water authority; 2. The necessary amendments in the legislation; 3. Cutting down the bureaucracy in the spheres of recycling and reclamation (enhancing the construction of sewage treatment plants, solutions to the problem of brine, and stopping the flow of effluents into the sea); 4. Improving measures to induce education, information and saving; 5. Encouraging the professions of water engineering, hydrology, water resource management etc., for the purpose of building a solid professional reserve, in order to broaden and deepen the spheres of research and development; 6. Returning the levels of the natural resources to above the hydraulic red lines by 2005, and after that - rehabilitating and strengthening the solidity of the natural water resources. The Committee held 26 meetings (including two outdoor excursions). We invested more than 140 hours in further study, updating, deliberations and summing up. I should like to thank the director of the Committee, Ms. Sigalit Edri, who coordinated with work of the Committee with skill and devotion. 7 The Knesset Research and Information Center, and especially Dr. Susan Hattis Rolef, who worked tirelessly to collect additional data and information, to examine it and guide the Committee by their light.