Unfairness still reigns in Water Charges - Leslie Cree MLA
I was amused to see that the Minister for Regional Development, Mr David Cairns being motivated, or was it stung, into responding to recent articles and letters in the Spectator on the unfair nature of the proposed water charges.
I make no apology for having been critical of the Government’s ill thought out handling of our water and sewerage problems in recent times. Conveniently Mr Cairns sidestepped some important issues, which need to be addressed.
The current problem emanates from over thirty years of neglect by successive British Governments. During this time ratepayers paid for the service.
In the mid nineties the Government invested heavily in the service in England and Wales. At the same time £50 million was agreed to be paid annually to Northern Ireland for water and sewerage improvements. It would appear that the money simply went into “the pot”.
The upgrading of the services was necessary because of a European Directive.
One wonders when the improvements may have been made if Europe had not intervened?
The Governments current proposals remain unfair for a variety of reasons despite their fumbling and reluctant concessions as a result of pressure from many quarters.
Developers should pay for the provision of services to new housing. Now conceded but still no sign of the saving been passed on to the consumer.
Road drainage costs should be paid by road users and not by water consumers – still no change.
The latest references by Government to the introduction of an affordability tariff are unclear. Does this mean that to qualify one has to be in receipt of benefit? Or does “low income” mean some system of “means testing?
A call to the Water Reform Office today did not provide any clarification. “We hope to make a further announcement on metering in the autumn”!
Certainly the modern standards of water and sewerage provision must be applied and a fair system of charging implemented. It must be clear and easily understood. It could be on the Regional rates or if an alternative system is agreed, metering must be provided. The former Minister said there was no alternative to the present proposals. That’s a pretty flimsy reason to continue down this route. If a bad idea is the only idea the Department can come up with, it’s not unreasonable for people to object.
If the Government is serious about interest groups producing alternatives, then it should put a freeze on the process until a full debate has taken place on the Assembly floor.
I had tabled a motion for private members’ business on 19th May 2006 but the Secretary of State has not yet agreed for the issue to be debated.
Mr Cairns in his article again draws attention to Northern Ireland paying less than the average that people living in Great Britain pay. I wonder if this is the reason? This comparison glosses over regions in Great Britain where Northern Ireland compares favourably. It also ignores other factors such as average wages in N. I. are around 20% less than the rest of the UK. We also pay substantially more for electricity and around two thirds more for our gas than the mainland. Regional price levels also show that we pay on average more than Scotland, Wales, the North East and Yorkshire/ Humberside.
Mr Hanson, another Minister in the Government has told us that the increase in the Regional Rate this year will raise an estimated additional £42 million from domestic properties in Northern Ireland. The introduction of 25% rating for manufacturing companies will produce a further £18million in 2006/07. Non-domestic vacant rating is estimated to raise a further £5.5million.
There are other bigger issues in the Governments intentions. Water charging is planned to commence next year and by 2010 the full charges will be applied. At this time water and sewerage services will transfer from the Government to the Regulator, he or she will then decide the charges.
It may be that the sole purpose of separate charging is to prepare the water service for a quick sale.
The experience across the water does not provide much comfort. The water companies wrote off £960 million in bad debts last year. Fifteen percent of householders consistently refuse to pay their bills. Leakage targets set by the Regulator are not achieved. Thames Water applied for an emergency drought order. These are the “benefits” of 17 years of privatisation.
Whilst I have no difficulty in supporting private industry as a principle the Government has left too many imponderables for the matter to be a success.
Government must cease their “suck it and see” approach to this important issue and return to the drawing board.