Sewage service tax by stealth

During the discussion held in Parliament with respect to the financial estimates of the Water Services Corporation, the government admitted that, according to the Water Framework Directive, WSC has to operate on a full cost recovery basis for the provision of utilities, in this case, the provision of potable water and the collection and treatment of waste water.

It has also transpired that the government has introduced a tariff for the provision of the sewage service by stealth. This has been incorporated within the service charge for the water meter. A flat rate of €20 per account is the tariff for the provision of the sewage service.

In my opinion, this tariff is socially unjust because it is a flat rate that applies to all residential units (as well as to all other categories of development) irrespective of size of household and water consumption.

One must bear in mind that there is a direct relation between the consumption of water and the use of the sewage system - most of the water used usually ends up in the sewage system.

Thus, the more water is consumed, probably the more waste water is produced. Hence, whoever uses the most water makes the most use of the sewage infrastructure in terms of sewage collection and, eventually, treatment.

We also know that there is a direct relationship between standard of living and use of water. People who enjoy a better standard of living usually use more water.

With the tariff system for sewage as is being implemented, those who use water carefully and who, thus, make less use of the sewage system pay the same tariff for using the system as those who use a much greater amount of water.

In these circumstances, I feel that, rather than applying a flat tariff, it would make more sense if the charge is based on water consumption: those who consume more water and, therefore, use the sewage system more should pay a higher tariff. Obviously, this has to take into account size of household.

Such a tariff was proposed during the 1996-1998 Labour Administration but was heavily criticised by the Nationalist Party then in opposition and was called a tax on all doors. Well, we have now gone round full circle and a flat rate tariff as is being applied would certainly qualify as a tax on all doors.

One must also bear in mind that the sewage tariff imposed to date does not provide for the full cost recovery of the sewage service. The present tariff annually amounts to €4,877,520, which leaves a shortfall of about €14 million, currently being financed by means of a government subvention.

When all the sewage treatment plants (including the largest one at Ta' Barkat) start functioning, than WSC would have to review the full cost for the provision of sewage services and the sewage tariff would be at least four times higher than what it is today. This would certainly be a hefty tariff that would place an additional burden on the already strained finances of most households.

It is for this reason that this tariff must be structured in a socially just manner.

In 1998, the PN's cheap political rhetoric that they would never impose such a tariff has proven to be an empty promise. At the time, the PN knew that the construction of sewage infrastructure and treatment plants through EU or European Investment Bank funds necessitates the introduction of a tariff for the provision of sewage services.

The PN's short-term political gain is the loss of our country because, at the time, it was envisaged that all the sewage treatment plants would have been completed by the year 2000, thus ensuring a better sea environment and a steady supply of second class water.

The least the Nationalist government can do now is ensure that the sewage tariff is a socially just tariff that does not impose more financial hardship on those who are the most vulnerable.

The author, an architect, is the opposition's main spokesman on infrastructure and capital projects.