How your water bill could be key to Modi govt’s infra push for $5 trillion-economy goal
THE PRINT
February 19, 2020
Enhance the fees for water and sewerage facilities to
recover the operational costs of big-ticket infrastructure projects in the two
areas. This is a suggestion offered by the Department of Economic Affairs
(DEA), which comes under the Union Finance Ministry, at a meeting on 30
January, The Print has learnt.
According to sources privy to
discussions at the meeting, the idea behind increased tariffs is to make
India’s big infrastructure push under the National Infrastructure Pipeline
(NIP) more financially viable.
The January meeting, held by the
DEA secretary, was aimed at discussing measures to garner funds for the Modi
government’s NIP and put it on a solid footing for the long run.
The NIP is
a key pillar of the government’s aim to make India a $5 trillion economy by
2024, which will entail an
estimated expenditure of Rs 100 lakh crore on infrastructure. The
NIP is meant to oversee and facilitate the efficient execution of projects to
make sure India stays on course for its $5 trillion goal.
Speaking
to The Print, government sources said the DEA suggested tapping user fees as a
potential and sustainable resource for upkeep and upgrades of certain projects.
The increased water and sewerage tariff, they added, was proposed as a possible
starting point before a larger rollout.
Another
suggestion discussed at the meeting was that smaller cities should not rush
into building metro projects, which are extremely capital-intensive, and
instead settle for alternatives like the Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS).
‘User charges for services
like water’
The DEA,
according to government sources, is of the view that the central and state
governments should at least try to recover the operational costs of big-ticket
infrastructure projects since they involve heavy capital investment.
“For
instance, the meeting discussed levying user fee for water and sewerage
facilities,” a government source said.
Currently,
many states, including Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh, have fixed user charges
for water — which includes a sewerage component — but they are seen as inadequate
vis-a-vis the expenditure incurred in providing the service.
However,
the DEA has ruled out setting up a water regulatory authority, on the lines of
similar regulators in sectors like power and telecom, to fix tariffs, the
source added.
“A water
regulator will run into opposition from different quarters, defeating the whole
purpose. There is a need to come up with an alternative mechanism to recover
the operational costs.”
Proposals
to set up water regulators have been mooted in the past too but have met with
stiff opposition from different quarters, primarily because they might entail
regular tariff increases.
The
central government’s proposed National Water Framework Bill 2016, which seeks
to put in place a legal framework for water supply in India, also suggests an
independent water regulatory authority for providing equitable access at a fair
price. But it is yet to see the light of day and hasn’t even come up before the
Union Cabinet yet.
Currently,
Maharashtra is the only Indian state that has a functional water regulatory
authority, but it does not have the power to fix tariffs for domestic water
use. Its role is restricted to regulating water use for industrial and
irrigation purposes, besides oversight over the supply network.
Union
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had in December announced the government’s
decision to launch the NIP, under which the central and state governments will
share 39 per cent of the investment each. The remaining funds have to come from
the private sector.
Having
announced the pipeline, the government has been exploring different funding
options as budget allocations offer a limited legroom.
‘Metro rail not feasible for
smaller cities’
Another
issue that came for discussion at the DEA meeting was Metro projects, a crucial
initiative for cities looking to decongest roads as well as ease access for
those living on the outskirts.
“There was
a consensus that smaller cities should not push for Metro projects as they are
hugely capital-extensive and may not be financially viable for states,” said a
second government source.
Metro
projects are jointly funded by the central and state governments. While the
former provides 20 per cent of the capital costs, states put in about 30 per
cent. The remaining is borrowed from the market.
Over the
last few years, proposals have been mooted for Metro services in Tier-I and
Tier II cities such as Chandigarh, Patna, Kanpur, Varanasi and Kochi. The
project is already live in Kochi.
“Metro
projects could end up burning a big hole in the exchequer at a time when the
government is looking at viable alternatives to finance the NIP,” the source
added.
Instead of Metro projects, the
Union Ministry of Finance wants cities to consider alternatives like the Bus
Rapid Transit System.
Comments
Post a Comment