❓ A parliamentary question regarding proposed water charge increases in Western Australia, specifically questioning the impact on low water users and the justification for the pricing structure. The Minister's response defends the increases as necessary to cover the cost of new water sources and encourage responsible water usage.
AnsweredQoN 177Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WATER CHARGES 177. Mr J.H.D. DAY to the Minister for Water Resources: I refer to the Treasurer’s proposal to increase water charges by eight per cent for the average household. (1) What will be the new charges for residential water consumption? (2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
WATER CHARGES
I refer to the Treasurer’s proposal to increase water charges by eight per cent for the average household. (1) What will be the new charges for residential water consumption? (2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(1) What will be the new charges for residential water consumption? (2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
WATER CHARGES
I refer to the Treasurer’s proposal to increase water charges by eight per cent for the average household. (1) What will be the new charges for residential water consumption? (2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(1) What will be the new charges for residential water consumption? (2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(2) Can the minister confirm that households with lower water usage will face an increase in their water consumption bills well above the Treasurer’s claim of eight per cent within a minimum range of 82c a kilolitre? (3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(3) Why is the government punishing low water users with a greater percentage increase in their water bills through this new regressive price structure? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
(1)-(3) Eight per cent is the average increase. Clearly, there are different bands, and currently there are five different price bands. Over an eight to 10-year period, the cost of new sources, which will be higher, will be built in. The desalination plant at Kwinana incurs a general cost of about $1.20 a kilolitre, depending on the year - it started at $1.16 a kilolitre - but inflation must be built in. We said before even committing to build the Kwinana seawater desalination plant that it would cost, on average, just less than $50 and that people would have to pay that. We were up-front about it, but we are phasing that in over a number of years. In addition to that, the Economic Regulation Authority indicated that water should be more appropriately priced to be a clear signal to watch usage, and that we should be reducing the fixed charge, which I think the member is well aware of, and increasing the costs per kilolitre. There are a range of ups and downs across the various users. We will be moving over time from that five-tier system to a three-tier system. The water priced at 80c or $1.20 in last year’s dollars will continue to increase. Both those figures are the two benchmarks for new sources to be developed. In addition to that, we have included a higher level to make sure we send a very clear price signal to people using excess water. The question about what price signal will reduce usage is one that we are yet to determine. We need to look back at practices. A whole lot of fantasies have been suggested by members opposite, but there is strong support among the community to price water so that people use it wisely. No other quality product can be delivered to every household for less than $1 a tonne. People recognise that and pricing is being set to cover the cost of providing water. It is very obvious that we need to send price signals so that people will be more cautious in their use of water.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.