The publication this week of a comprehensive study on Dublin's water needs could hardly have been more timely, after the recent Dublin West by election pushed the water charges issue up the political agenda. The report is unequivocal in its support for much more widespread water charges and signals that the installation of water meters in each home may be the only way to finance the water system into the next century.
On the basis of the report, few could deny the need for major investment in water projects. The most startling fact to emerge is that about 160 million litres of water per day - almost half of the Dublin area's total supply - is literally poured down the drain because of widespread leaks in the distribution network. This unacceptably high level of leakage is significantly more than in any other European capitals' and provides damning evidence that the system is overwhelmed by the demands made upon it.
The task now is twofold: investment is required to plug the leaks and to expand the supply network. But the cost is also prohibitively high: the consultants - estimate that over £500 million will have to be invested in major water projects in the Dublin area over the next twenty years, of which £160 million will be required by the year 2000.
The question, as always, is who should pay for this investment? Clearly the present system, in which major cities like Dublin and Limerick are exempt from water charges while other areas pay anything between £25, and £150 per year is unsustainable in the longer term. It makes no sense to ask one sector of the community to pay for a service which others can enjoy without charge. There is also the conservation issue a free water supply like that in Dublin city does little to encourage water conservation. And there is the equity issue it hardly seems fair that every household in any one council or corporation area pays the same water charge irrespective of use.
The case for uniform water charges in the short term and a move to water meters in each household in the longer term, is persuasive: this is perhaps the best and most equitable means of paying for the investment that the water system so badly needs.
Those who have campaigned so vigorously against the water charges would see any such regime as an additional form of taxation. They are right when they point to the grossly inequitable taxation system in this State, to the undue burden which falls on the PAYE sector and to the manner in which many of those best able to pay, appear able to minimise their tax liability.
They have a well grounded case for tax reform but this should be made on its own merits: it should not be used to delay the introduction of a sensible and much needed service charge. Whether the politicians have the courage to address the issue is another question. After the publication of this week's report, the Minister for the Environment, Mr Howlin, said pointedly that "politicians will reflect on the views expressed by the voters in Dublin West". It is to be hoped that these comments are not a prelude to more fudge and compromise. The water issue needs to be fully addressed without any further delay.