HC Deb 16 February 1994 vol 237 cc932-3
4. Ms Eagle

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he intends to take in respect of the practice of charging for water by compulsory metering of the domestic water supply.

The Minister for the Environment and Countryside (Mr. Robert Atkins)

The basis for charging is a matter for each water company.

Ms Eagle

Yet another answer from the Government in which they say that something is not a matter for them. We have just heard a lot about choice from Ministers, yet water metering is rarely a matter of choice; in fact it is compulsory. Does the Minister agree that when water is compulsorily metered there is a vast increase in the size of bills? What will he say to my constituents, Mr. and Mrs. McGregor, who have seen their charge of £70 a year for water transformed into a charge of £144 for the first quarter—an increase of close to 700 per cent.—which they simply cannot pay?

Mr. Atkins

The hon. Lady flies in the face of the facts that confront the average user of, say, electricity or of gas, which is metered and distributed on the basis of those who can afford to pay.

Mr. Enright

But sewage charges are not metered.

Mr. Atkins

If the hon. Gentleman were to be quiet for once, he might hear something to his advantage.

The hon. Member for Wallasey (Ms Eagle) must understand, as I am sure that many people do, that if we are to be concerned about difficulties with water—for example, the demands for water that we have seen during drought periods in parts of England—we must understand that it is a commodity that may have to be treated in similar ways to others. I do not pretend to offer an absolute answer. Perhaps she would like to consult her Front Bench about the environmental concepts that she pretends to put forward in what, after all, is a point that does not have much validity.

Mr. Thomason

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is not unreasonable for people to pay for what they use? Therefore, is not it right that subsidy should not be given when one bears in mind that, on average, with a metering system people will pay exactly the same? That point of elementary mathematics appears to have been misunderstood, or is incapable of appreciation, by Opposition Members.

Mr. Atkins

My hon. Friend is quite right. Opposition Members are not very good at mathematics. Although vie should be tolerant of their foibles, the fact remains that, as is often the case with environmental issues, they say one thing here and another outside.

Mr. Chris Smith

The Minister must accept, however, that compulsory metering hits many households, especially large families with children and those with disabilities who need frequent bathing. If the Minister is worried about the environmental effects of drought, will he tell the water companies to do something about the 25 per cent. leakage of water, which is lost from the system and never gets to households? Does not he recognise that compulsory metering takes no account of human need, that it rations by price and discourages proper hygiene? Will he now ensure that private water companies such as Anglian Water, which has already embarked on a programme of compulsory metering, are told to desist in no uncertain terms?

Mr. Atkins

The hon. Gentleman cannot have it both ways. The fact remains that gas and electricity, which are metered—

Ms Eagle

They are quite different.

Mr. Atkins

They are not quite different; they are comparable and those utilities are required by average families, who pay accordingly. The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) knows as well as I do that those in need and the more vulnerable members of society are able to obtain help and support from benefit offices. There is no point in the hon. Gentleman standing at the Dispatch Box to suggest that metering is not on. There are alternative methods of payment, of which metering is one.

Forward to