From the Examiner Launceston ratepayers will be slugged $5.8 million by the Tasmanian Water and Sewerage Corporation each year from this July for its combined sewerage and stormwater infrastructure - a charge Launceston Mayor Albert van Zetten has labelled unaffordable.
Auditors KPMG recently advised Ben Lomond Water that the company should charge the Launceston City Council for the combined system.
The $5.8 million sum includes infrastructure operating costs ($2.3 million), depreciation ($2.26 million) and a 1.3 per cent capital charge ($1.24 million).
Corporation chairman Miles Hampton, in a letter, acknowledged the steep cost but said it would be inequitable on Ben Lomond Water customers not to charge the council.
Mr Hampton said the decision was prompted by impending urban stormwater legislation that would not deliver a return to the corporation and its council shareholders for stormwater assets.
Mr Hampton has told the Primary Industries Department there should be the same three-per-cent return on stormwater assets as there was on non-stormwater assets.
Alderman van Zetten said the council would appeal to Premier Lara Giddings and Water Minister Bryan Green for the system's cost to be spread across the new state water authority's customer base.
He said the council had unsuccessfully attempted to get a resolution on its combined system before the water and sewerage corporations were formed in 2009.
The council had sought to retain ownership of the combined infrastructure and to charge the water company $11 million for operating costs, depreciation and a seven-per-cent capital charge.
The government transferred ownership regardless but no agreement between Ben Lomond Water and the Tasmanian Water and Sewerage Corporation on charging for the infrastructure was able to be reached - until now.
Alderman van Zetten said it seemed that ``goal posts have been shifted''.
'The proposed impost is unaffordable for the Launceston City Council and would be a gross injustice to the people of Launceston,' he said.
`We believe the fairest outcome is a slight change in the legislation to recognise the combined system as a regulated service, and to allow the new statewide water authority to include the cost of the system in its pricing determination across its broad customer base.'
Launceston is the largest shareholder in Ben Lomond Water.
Launceston City Council general manager Robert Dobrzynski said in a bill submission said the cost of supplying services to consumers in areas where there was no return on investment was absorbed by all users, and so it should be with Launceston's combined system.
He said to do otherwise suggested cross-subsidies were selectively acceptable for some of Ben Lomond Water's services but not others.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that water & sewerage were taken from councils because councils under resourced them. They wouldn't pay to maintain & upgrade them then & they don't want to pay now. The easiest way to 'spread the cost' would be to amalgamate all 29 councils in to one. How much of the $36 million dollars paid to the desk jockeys & councillors could be redirected to fund this?
ReplyDeleteEsk Water (4 councils) was delivering the same water quality at a cheaper cost and at a profit.
ReplyDeleteHog wash! Tas Parliament transcripts page 1 Ben Lomond Water, Mr MILES HAMPTON, states ' In our first year we recorded an after-tax profit of $5.2 million, which was significantly above budget.'sic (THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY SELECT COMMITTEE INTO THE TASMANIAN WATER AND SEWERAGE CORPORATIONS MET IN HENTY HOUSE, LAUNCESTON, ON FRIDAY, 4 MARCH 2011.) On page 14 they mention they have NO SAFTEY DEVISE INSTALLED WITH REGARD TO OVERDOSING OF FLUORIDE! Mr BEST - You have here, 'Fluoridation facilities do not include in-line monitoring of dosage and often do not include overdosing fail-safe provisions'. You say, 'Solutions to both problems are being implemented'. Are we not sure how much fluoridation is going out into the -sic If they cared about people more that their profits they would of put in safety devises!!! They don't care about us little people!! We are ruled by greedy thieves!!! Three months later we were OVERDOSED and they desperately tried to cover it up with lies & deceit! People were crippled from high levels of fluoride and were lead to believe it was arthritis!!! The NEWS papers wouldn't print about it & law firms claimed a conflict of interest when I wanted to take class action against them. The public are being lied to and treated like insects!!!
ReplyDeleteI have a Taswater line running through my backyard providing service to my neighbour who is more than 400 metres from his water meter. It runs through 3 properties and not down the roadway.The line is illegal and is some 60years old. It fractures regularly and is of great concern to me and my husband as it also runs under our buildings. Ben Lomond is of the opinion that it is not that urgent and thinks band aid fixes are all that is required. The B.O.D. Council plumber identified the line some 12 years ago and told us the Council would do nothing about it.The then Works manager refused to deal with it. My meter is 38 metres from my boundary and is also illegal. I am sick of being ignored and duckshoved over this, and if this is how the Customers are treated then what would happen if this State actually got going again and there was also an increased demand on the already very sad services.To date only one Ben Lomond worker (face to face) has identified himself to me. Pretty rude I think. I am considering charging them rent as there is no easement through my land.
ReplyDeleteIf it is illegal as you say cut the line and cap it.
DeleteOn 2 February I put up a post regarding my illegal water line - a situation in existence for some 12 years and for previous owners, well before that. Today 5th February the Taswater crew is busy rectifying the situation. I am very pleased with their work and surprised they have lifted their communication standards. I guess that all good things come to those who wait - or jump up and down enough! The original circumstances came about under the Break O Day Council when it was the Fingal Council. It looks like my problems will be well sorted by tomorrow and I am today a happy customer.... At Last.
ReplyDelete