| Allan Wilson:
I agree with
Brian Fitzpatrick, who compared today to "Groundhog Day". I recall many
similar debates with Mr Sheridan in the 1980s, when he was a member of
Militant in the Labour party, about the number of angels who could dance
on the head of a pin. In his attempt to hang a rather unsophisticated model
for redistributing income, if not wealth, on the nearest passing vehicle,
he has missed some fairly fundamental philosophical debating points.
A water charge
is not a tax, but a payment for services provided. Charges must relate
to the use of services, but Mr Sheridan's proposals divorce the level of
charge from the service that is provided. Charges must produce sufficient
resources to fund services, as the current system does. Mr Sheridan claimed
that his scheme would collect more, but why should the Scottish charge
payer be burdened with higher charges than are necessary?
In the competitive
environment that the water industry is about to enter, there is a serious
risk of the consumer opting to desert a high-charge, high-tax public service
in favour of a low-cost private alternative. As ever, the losers would
be the low paid and those who are on fixed incomes—the very people whom
Tommy Sheridan hopes would benefit from his proposal.
I have heard
nothing that substantiates any claim that Mr Sheridan has made, particularly
the claim that his scheme could be cost-effective. Administrative costs
would surely outweigh any benefits.
As Ross Finnie
and Johann Lamont said, the Executive fully accepts that the current system
is not perfect. Scottish Water will consider the future of billing and
collection arrangements. We are therefore committed to ensuring that more
work is done on affordability issues, including research by the water industry
commissioner, whom we have asked to inform us of his findings. That will
ensure that affordability issues are taken fully into account as Scottish
Water considers options for tariff structuring, billing and collection
arrangements.
However, the
claim that, in the interim, Mr Sheridan's proposals represent an improvement
on the current system is misguided. The current system has proved workable,
fair, equitable and efficient. It successfully funds the Scottish water
industry, relates charges to the service that is provided and ensures that
customers remain at the heart of the system. It addresses ability to pay
through a link to council tax bands and the transitional affordability
scheme.
I commend the
Executive's amendment to the Parliament.
To
read this debate in full, click here
|
