-
Jonu is correct. You pay for the availability of water to your property and all the associated costs including treatment, not the water itself. However the charge is done by calculating the number of litres through your meter.
And if you live in Auckland you pay for waste water charges as a percentage of your water used.
User pays.
Last edited by 777; 06-09-2017 at 03:55 PM.
-
In Auckland city you also get charged for disposing of the water - based on the amount you use- they take % of what you use - hence billed by the cubic metre (also to work out your portion of treatment costs) and say that % goes down the storm water so we will charge you X amount per cubic metre for maintaining the infrastructure
Always what I understood, you are paying for the infrastructure not the water itself , the amount used is to come up with a number - users pays - you use more water you pay more for using the pipes, treatment etc.
Just what I was trying to say 777 - beat me to it
-
Of course Jonu is correct and JT wrong. No Council in NZ owns the water and therefore can not charge for it. This is the fundamental change with Labour's proposed policy and it will lead to never ending litigation by Maori and other stakeholders
-
Originally Posted by iceman
Of course Jonu is correct and JT wrong. No Council in NZ owns the water and therefore can not charge for it. This is the fundamental change with Labour's proposed policy and it will lead to never ending litigation by Maori and other stakeholders
it will be intersting to see how that whanganui river negotiates now that it is a real person. I presume it would be able to prostitute itself by selling its main body of water to any one willing to pay the price.
Also potential liability problems - what if there is an oversupply which creates harm.
Last edited by minimoke; 06-09-2017 at 07:16 PM.
Reason: spelling
-
Originally Posted by Joshuatree
Wrong again. i have my account in front of me , i get charged by the cubic metre ; a meter man comes around regularly to read it. tui.
JT you really should stop digging this hole for yourself. Maybe ask one of your more knowledgeable labourites for clarification if you don't believe me. Maybe this is the problem in a nut shell and no one in Labour understands it!
-
The more cubes i use the more i pay by what volume i use. ; looks like water,sounds like water, flows like cool, clear water of life.To me i am paying for water . My rates cover everything else. User pays hence the conserving since the meters were put in. People don't leave their sprinklers on all night in summer anymore.User pays(a tiny bit) and the funds will be directed back into improving water purposes in that area except our council use it for who knows what. Me and the other 70% of kiwis agree. Farmers , orchardists etc will all up their game and embrace new tech; drones for instance, new business's and jobs. WINWINWIN
-
Originally Posted by Joshuatree
The more cubes i use the more i pay by what volume i use. ; looks like water,sounds like water, flows like cool, clear water of life.To me i am paying for water . My rates cover everything else. User pays hence the conserving since the meters were put in. People don't leave their sprinklers on all night in summer anymore.User pays(a tiny bit) and the funds will be directed back into improving water purposes in that area except our council use it for who knows what. Me and the other 70% of kiwis agree. Farmers , orchardists etc will all up their game and embrace new tech; drones for instance, new business's and jobs. WINWINWIN
JT, I think you are mangling yoru arguments.
The reason you at more for the more water you use is because it costs more to pump it out of the ground, treat it, test and then pump it to your door. So you are paying for these extra costs.
I haven't heard that the tax on water is for conservation purposes - I thought it was a royalty to help get the waterways cleaner
Broadly speaking we don't need to conserve water - we are fortunate that we have an over-abundance of the stuff
-
Originally Posted by minimoke
JT, I think you are mangling yoru arguments.
The reason you at more for the more water you use is because it costs more to pump it out of the ground, treat it, test and then pump it to your door. So you are paying for these extra costs.
I haven't heard that the tax on water is for conservation purposes - I thought it was a royalty to help get the waterways cleaner
Broadly speaking we don't need to conserve water - we are fortunate that we have an over-abundance of the stuff
Labour's candidate in Waitaki told a meeting recently the Council could use it for roads !! They are obviously not clear on what the new tax revenue is going to be used for
-
Originally Posted by Joshuatree
The more cubes i use the more i pay by what volume i use. ; looks like water,sounds like water, flows like cool, clear water of life.To me i am paying for water . My rates cover everything else. User pays hence the conserving since the meters were put in. People don't leave their sprinklers on all night in summer anymore.User pays(a tiny bit) and the funds will be directed back into improving water purposes in that area except our council use it for who knows what. Me and the other 70% of kiwis agree. Farmers , orchardists etc will all up their game and embrace new tech; drones for instance, new business's and jobs. WINWINWIN
I'm really beginning to wonder if Labour's policy people (I resume they have a policy team and that Jacinda doesn't just make stuff up) have the same level of understanding as poor old JT.
"Hey I've got an idea, let's start charging people for water, you know, the stuff that is wet and no one owns. It's a slippery little sucker and tends to flow all over the place and fall from the sky and stuff, but hey, there's a tax in there somewhere. While we are at it, air isn't much different. I know it's an old joke but we could actually tax people for breathing! Someone write this stuff down!"
Discl: I may actually not be quoting any real person, but I am scared I am
Last edited by jonu; 07-09-2017 at 09:39 PM.
Reason: right/write
-
Originally Posted by jonu
I'm really beginning to wonder if Labour's policy people (I resume they have a policy team and that Jacinda doesn't just make stuff up) have the same level of understanding as poor old JT.
"Hey I've got an idea, let's start charging people for water, you know, the stuff that is wet and no one owns. It's a slippery little sucker and tends to flow all over the place and fall from the sky and stuff, but hey, there's a tax in there somewhere. While we are at it, air isn't much different. I know it's an old joke but we could actually tax people for breathing! Someone right this stuff down!"
Discl: I may actually not be quoting any real person, but I am scared I am
Oh, you definitely am !!
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks