There has been lot
of discussions on the proposed electricity tariff revision, but none on the
proposed Water Tariff Revision in Thimphu. It also seems there is no authority/agency
besides the cabinet that is there to check the Water Tariff unlike electricity
or other goods. I would like to point out some serious flaws with the overall
water metering and tariff system all across the country and in particular in
Thimphu city.
1. Currently, people living in multiple apartment
buildings in Thimphu pay the higher rates, as the rates are higher for more
consumption. For instance a house in Thimphu with City water connection is
allowed to and provided with only one water meter for a household and not for
every family/ apartment. This is probably not by law, but implemented by the
existing system and practicality of metering and plumbing ease. The water
tariff for three slabs of consumption with lower rates for lower consumption
and higher rates for higher use thus are not applicable as the consumption of
4-10 families living inside the whole house is clubbed together. This totally
defeats the calculation that Kuensel or other agencies have made for each
family for all buildings with multiple families and apartments. In this regard,
I think we should first look at either providing individual meters for each
apartments or take the total number of apartments connected to a water meter
into consideration instead of taking the total consumption of the whole
building together and using the corresponding rate. This will ensure that we
determine actual consumption of each family and apply the appropriate rates. If
we look carefully at the bills, rich people in Thimphu living in individual cottages
and duplexes with individual meters would be paying lower water tariff than
less-to-do people living in apartment complexes.
2. Non-commercial residents in Norzin Lam are
charged with commercial rates as well. If we look at the buildings on Norzin
Lam, most of them do have commercial establishments such as shops, offices or
restaurant on the first 1-2 floors, but more than half of the spaces in all
buildings are residential. But all the buildings I know of on Norzin Lam are
charged with Commercial Water tariff as there is only one water meter for the
whole house. So while10-20% of the space are for commercial purpose, all other
80-90% occupants with residential homes land up paying the commercial rate
which is more than twice the rate for domestic water use. Therefore there
should be a scrutiny of the actual user types on Norzin Lam, and maybe in other
places too, instead of continuing with charging with commercial rates.
3.
The
reason for Water Tariff revision as recommended by World Bank and ADB should
not be our justifications for tariff revision. According to the Kuensel report
on May 25, 2013 it says that “ for Thimphu Thromde total revenue generation through water and sewerage service
was Nu 345.9M while their expenditure stood at Nu 187.6M with an annual excess
of Nu 79.1M.” Based on this figures, it is very clear that the Thromde is
generating more than enough money to pay for the expenses. World Bank and ADB
indeed are very important donors and partners for Bhutan and Thromde, but then
we have to use our own logic and calculations before a tariff revision that
will burden the common citizens of Bhutan. Whenever there is electricity, gas
or any other utility service tariff revision there should be an economic
analysis. Is there such a calculation for Thromde? Simply going by some donor’s
recommendation should not be our decision as they would definitely understand
that we have social issues at home to be taken care.
4.
Improvement
of the service would be required before a rate revision or atleast a plan on
improvement or how to use the excess money. We should know that water is an
indispensible requirement and it also involves cost to get water everywhere.
However, if look around in Thimphu City, half of the city receives only water
for 3-4 hrs a day. Good example is Norzin Lam- the heart of Thimphu city! where
there is only water supply for 2-3hrs a day. People have to use all sorts of
measures such as giant tanks to buckets to jerry cans to store water and at
times get it from other areas. I seriously think it will be necessary for the
Thromde to work on providing a better service or atleast start that process
before a rate revision that does not even seem necessary at the moment. If
there is reliable adequate water supply for 24hrs, I don’t think people will
mind paying for the service.
