I. The WCD : Why were we set up and where we have reached?

A lot has happened in the life of the World Commission on Dams since my video address at your Congress in Granada last year. We have completed our work programme, fulfilled our mandate and in just over three weeks will be delivering our report - unanimously supported by all twelve Commissioners. With the handover of the report we have conquered one challenge and now hand the mantle back to those that established the Commission in the hope that they seize this opportunity to step forward together rather than step backwards into conflict. The events of recent years in India demonstrate why a Commission was necessary - the cost of conflict has been too great for all parties.

Let me start with a quotation from a recent article by a senate member of the UK's Engineering Council entitled "Consequences of Engineering". He goes on to make the case for engineers to take greater responsibility for ethical and environmental aspects of projects - a point to which I will return later. I quote….

'Have you ever wondered about the Great Pyramids? Do you think anyone questioned their construction? Was it not a waste of public money…when really what was needed were new roads, harbours and a better water supply? ….would there have been a debate on whether it was right to use slave labour…?. '

These days, the level of public scrutiny is different - look at the heated public debate about the financial costs and relevance of the Milennium Dome in London. And more importantly for us, look again at the impasse that was reached in the debate over dams in so many countries and the very reasons that 39 people from a broad range of backgrounds agreed together in Gland in 1997 to establish the WCD. A process that since then has drawn financial support from 53 contributors from such diverse backgrounds as governments, private sector organisations, NGOs, bilateral and multilaterals, and foundations.

The Work Programme of the Commission was designed to provide a window on the multitude of issues and perspectives in the debate. Over the past two years, the Commission was informed by 7 case studies, 3 country studies, 17 thematic reviews, a cross check survey of 125 dams, and 950 submissions. It organised four regional consultations.

These elements of the work programme were all inputs to the Commission's deliberations but do not form the Commission's position. We have done a lot of listening and now it is our turn to speak. The twelve Commissioners have come up with a unique response - one that has the full support of us all. As an independent Commission we were not beholden to any ideological preconception or vested interest. We were free to come to our own conclusion.

So, why is delivering a final report signed by all Commissioners on November 16 such an important landmark? Prior to the Gland Workshop, people from opposing viewpoints did not sit down together - positions became more and more entrenched. There was a view that the Commission wouldn't survive beyond our first meeting. In practice though, the Commission has brought people together and provided a meaningful forum for open and rational discussion of the issues and presentation of views. This is in part due to the commitment and passion of the Commissioners, but in a great part due to our stakeholders many of whom have recognised the opportunities provided by this independent Commission and made efforts to make information available.

Countries from around the world have seized this opportunity and contributed greatly to this approach - Sri Lanka, Brazil, Egypt, and Vietnam were all prominent in this regard by hosting our regional consultations. But the multitude of other countries that made presentations also showed a tremendous willingness to listen to one another's views.

Given the intensity of feelings surrounding the dams debate, it would be naïve to assume that all would go smoothly and of course differing perspectives still exist. We know that not everyone embraces the WCD process. I hope though that whatever one's viewpoint, the WCD process has shown that a stand off situation is not an inevitable result to this conflict, but that a way forward can be found on what seem to be intransigent problems. Our report provides the means and will be the testimony of the Commission, long after it has ceased to exist.

So, on November 16 in London, the WCD report will be launched by Nelson Mandela with the active participation of the President of the World Bank, the Director General of IUCN, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Chairman of the 2nd World Water Forum, HRH the Prince of Orange. In the following two weeks, Commissioners and Staff will present the report to United Nations Secretary General in new York and to interested actors in about 15 cities around the world. Early next year, once people have had a chance to review the contents of the report, we will be sponsoring a series of regional workshops or seminars.

II. Some findings from the Knowledge Base

The first part of mandate was to prepare a Global Review of the development effectiveness of dams which indeed forms a substantial part of our final report. The report is under wraps until November 16, but the knowledge base we have created has been expanding daily and has been open for all to examine on our website. Let me share some of these findings with you - they also highlight the location specific context of the subject matter.

On power generation, 19% of the worlds electricity comes from hydropower. In 63 countries hydropower accounts for more than 50% of electricity supplied. In recent years, the number and viability of options for meeting electricity needs has increased and there are now more alternatives than at any time in the past.

About half of the world's dams were built for irrigation. A survey carried out by the Commission estimates that some 30-40% of irrigated area worldwide is supported by dam projects. There is great variability, with Egypt's irrigation almost wholly dependent on the storage of the Aswan Dam, while Nepal has less than 1% of its area irrigated from dams. We estimate that dams contribute in the order of 12-16% of the world's food production.

On social issues, the most visible problem has been displacement. The Commission estimates that between 40 and 80 million people have had to move as a result of large dams. In India and China alone, this figure is in the range of 26 to 58 million between 1950 and 1990. Many, many others have not been counted including those in downstream areas whose livelihoods were affected as a result of changes in ecosystems.

Too often, planned measures to mitigate environmental impacts have been inadequate. However, 29 countries have adopted a process of determining environmental flows necessary to maintain a sustainable balance between the services a dam provides and valued ecosystem functions.

These are just a sample of the sectoral findings. In our report we present much more and place them in an integrated analysis that examines the distribution of costs and benefits and who gained and who lost. We also present examples of good practice that fundamentally questions whether indeed there have to be losers.

III. How the WCD Report addresses points raised in the ICID position paper

From the beginning, I have said categorically that our report will not say "No to dams". Nor is it a document that forecasts future needs. That has been done by others. We recognise that these needs are real and focus on the changes necessary to meet them. Changes in the way options are assessed, policies are developed, and projects are planned, implemented and operated. We provide a new policy framework for the development of water and energy resources development that is as equally applicable to dams as it is to other options. Beyond the policy arena, we have developed practical criteria and guidelines that build on what is already available and can be used as a checklist against which compliance can be measured.

When I look at your own Position Paper on the Role of Dams, I see many questions raised that are entrenched in the WCD mandate. I also see many principles in the ICID paper that we ourselves would endorse, for example:

• sustainability
• minimising costs and risks
• ensuring all people are better off as a result of development projects;
• full stakeholder involvement; and
• equitable sharing of benefits.

IV. The challenge before us - lets grasp this opportunity

Naturally as Chair of the Commission, I am proud of our work and have an optimism that given time and space for reflection, our recommendations will find their way into everyday business. As a former Minister of Water Affairs, I know only too well the political commitment that is necessary to bring about change. We all resist change - it is in our nature. But when we look back afterwards, we often wonder why we had not changed before.

The Commission has done its work, the rest is up to those that established it. We are not looking for an extension or a transformation into another body. On November 16 we hand the mantle back to our godparents, but do so by providing a new direction to take this work forward.

Some elements of our Report you will find familiar, some you may not agree with, and others will hopefully make you look again and add to your appreciation of the issues. We trust that you will review it with an open mind. We are already aware that many organisations will take the next few months to assess our work and determine its relevance to them. Presdient Schultz has informed us that the national committees of ICID will be asked to prepare a response. ICOLD will do the same and IWRA has initiated a task force review. The multilateral banks and export credit agencies will also review it. I look forward to see how these responses unfold and how these prominent institutions grasp the challenge that lays ahead.

Returning to the article in the Engineering Council newsletter I referred to at the beginning of my address, it is their stated policy that 'All engineers have a responsibility to society and for the ethical and environmental impact of their work'

The author goes on to suggest that '..as professionals, they have an obligation to make sure the political decision makers are aware of the problems, the solutions and their consequences. And engineers must not opt out of that final process for it is an essential part of the total design. Remember: holistic engineering is not just completeness in concept, design and execution, but also relates to healing'. This is where it starts to get difficult. I hope though that the way forward charted in our report will make it easier.

I sincerely believe that the recommendations in the WCD Report, is consistent with ICIDs guiding principle, namely 'In pursuing its aims, ICID embraces the sound principles of socio-economic values and environmental management'. The price of ignoring the opportunity our report offers for the millions of people who require water and energy services, is too high to pay.

In closing, I would like to thank President Bart Schultz and the local South African organising Committee under Felix Reinders for allowing us this opportunity and to wish you all well in you discussions over the next few days. Also I hope that you have sufficient time to enjoy Cape Town, our Mother City. I am aware that President Schultz has to leave for another engagement , but I hope that others here will find time to stay longer and raise any questions or concerns. Also feel free to refill your plates and glasses.

Thank you all and Go Well.