Water rate woes
The analytical piece by Albert Brandford on higher water rates in the Sunday Sun of July 5th is a "must read" for all citizens.
It's much more than another excellent mix of analysis, research and fearless conclusions.
While Barbadians, particularly those in the lower income brackets, are burdened by a second increase inside 10 years, nothing is being done to reform a woefully inefficient system. Hence, if I understand his article correctly, unjustifiable cost is being dumped on the backs of consumers.
Add this to increasing energy costs, gasolene etc, the possibility of higher electricity rates in 2009 and the almost certainty of higher telephone rates when the Price Cap freeze which some of us worked hard on, ends at year-end, with an expected four per cent hike in January 2010 and we have a picture which is grim for the ordinary consumer and small business person.
What formula and empirical analysis were used to arise at another burden of water rates?
When last has a public, audited account been made available which could reveal inefficencies which even staff of the Barbados Water Authority acknowledge?
Hallam Hope
caritel@hallamhope.com
Posts
No Referendum, no Republic!
-
No Referendum, no Republic! I listened to our Prime Minister give an
interview on ABC Australia, part of which was carried on CBC-TV news on 17
Sep 2020. ...
3 years ago
2 comments:
I am at a loss as to how raising the water rates by 60 % will incerase the collection process of the BWA...Am I to understand that customers would not pay $20.00 per month but would pay $32.00...You know this is the same error we are making with immigration. We have not fixed the department but we have a new policy. Same thing with BWA...we have not fixed anything at BWA but we hae raised the rates....and what about the manufacturing and agricultural sectors....Do we understand what 60 percent of 800.00 per month is?
The increase in rates is also supposed to make the public more aware of the value of water and so reduce their consumption, but this argument is flawed due to the high minimum charge. Many (most?) households consume less than the minimum, so where's the incentive? It would have made sense to reduce the min. charge to shield the smallest/ poorest/ most frugal households whilst giving the remainder a goal to reduce their bill through reduced consumption. Reduced consumption would have helped to reduce the massive infrastructure upgrade costs that the BWA faces. Is it too late to act?
Post a Comment