The trade organization Water UK is advocating for the elimination of standing charges for water and is proposing that heavier users, such as those who own swimming pools or have expansive gardens, should face higher rates per litre.

While the organization argues that these new pricing strategies would appropriately reflect the increased strain that high-volume users impose on the water system and could lead to lower costs for the majority of customers, there is a debate on whether it is just to impose higher fees solely on larger users when their consumption does not always incur equivalent treatment costs.

Jeevan Jones, the chief economist at Water UK, stated:

Although water is a naturally occurring resource, the extensive network of pipes and infrastructure established is essential for sourcing, purifying, and distributing high-quality drinking water to nearly every household and business throughout the country.

This infrastructure is financed by consumer bills, and there is a prevailing sentiment that the payment structure could be reorganized to be both more equitable and sustainable. It’s our belief that individuals should be charged based on their actual usage.

One proposal involves the government requiring the installation of water meters, at no expense to households, particularly for the 40% of homes in England that are still billed according to outdated council tax valuations from the 1990s.

Moreover, sustainable water use is vital for alleviating stress on our environmental resources. After years of regulatory challenges to establish new reservoirs, there are plans to construct ten new ones. While these will enhance water supplies, their completion will require time.

In the interim, we advocate for regional pricing flexibility that aligns with local requirements. This means that prices could escalate with increased water usage, whereby your 1,000th litre would be priced higher than your initial litre.

This approach, referred to as a rising block tariff, would help decrease water bills for the majority of households by redistributing the costs of new infrastructures from families to the smaller cohort of significant water consumers, such as large commercial entities and those with extensive gardens or swimming pools.

Protective measures would be established for families with many children or those who have heightened medical requirements for water. Charging premium rates for substantial water users would also incentivize more prudent water consumption.

Funds generated through these measures would support lower bills for other households, including the elimination of standing charges and the development of new infrastructure aimed at increasing water supply.

Furthermore, we aim to assist families facing financial hardships. Water companies are committing £4.1 billion to alleviate bills for 3 million households over the next five years.

Together, these changes are expected to make water bills more equitable for all.

Opposition

Toby Buckland, a gardener and broadcaster, has expressed:

I agree that individuals ought to pay in accordance with their water usage. Water, as a limited resource, has become increasingly appreciated in recent times.

However, imposing higher charges per litre on those with larger gardens isn’t an appropriate resolution. In truth, gardeners should be subject to reduced rates.

Water bills consist of three components: fixed charges for maintenance, clean water service, and wastewater handling, the latter typically accounting for a substantial part of the total bill.

However, in a garden setting, water does not lead to sewerage; instead, it nourishes the soil, which means gardeners are unfairly charged for sewerage services that are never utilized.

When I owned a plant nursery, I arranged for a separate water meter for irrigation, which significantly reduced my costs, as it avoided sewerage fees.

Gardeners are already mindful of water conservation, diligently preserving this resource and applying it judiciously.

This diligence is evident in the use of water butts for rainwater collection and the implementation of trickle irrigation systems that deliver water efficiently to plant roots, minimizing evaporation.

Instances of sewerage overflows into rivers generally occur when intense rainfall leads to water runoff from urban areas, overwhelming drainage systems and resulting in flooding. Conversely, when rainpercolates in a garden, it mitigates such issues.

Moreover, the environmental advantages associated with green spaces significantly outweigh any fiscal burdens brought on by water management.

Those with larger gardens should not be held accountable for the infrastructural challenges faced by water companies.

What water companies are essentially imposing on gardeners is akin to enforcing a swimming pool tax, which is unjust.

In regard to the failing sewerage systems, gardeners should be recognized as part of the solution rather than viewed as contributors to the problem, and this should reflect in their water charges.