THE instant corollary that strikes the consumer's mind when water metering is mentioned is bigger bills.
What, then, of the report today that suggests that most households with low incomes would be better off if their water supply was metered?
The fact is that meters themselves are benign. It is the tariffs that count.
This fact is underlined today by a research group study suggesting that eight out of 10 poorer families could safely cut down on water use and benefit from lower bills.
It is an important consideration, especially when in low-income homes the difficulties of meeting utility bills are often real and economy on something as vital to health and hygiene as water can be risky.
But the report's crucial conclusion is that tariffs for metered water must be carefully set. The idea is that by offering water to cover essential needs at a low cost and raising the price for using larger quantities, the amount used could be cut by up to 20 per cent. Fine. But who fixes the tariffs?
Without the benefit of competition, the independent regulation of charges would have to be a whole lot better than it is now for water-users to put their trust in meters - given the soaking they have already had since privatisation.
Previous news story
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article