New water fees ‘threaten livelihoods’

By Pratch Rujivanarom 
The Nation

 

File photo

 

Academics warn of expected shortages

 

BANGKOK: -- CITING ITS likely impact of further impoverishing already vulnerable rice farmers, some academics and farming leaders are slamming a proposed new national water-use policy that would tax farmers for irrigating their fields.

 

Water Resources Department director-general Worasart Aphaiphong, as secretary of National Water Resources Committee, has spoken about government plans to increase efficiency in water use.

 

Thailand had a risk of water shortages, said Worasart, proposing a solution that includes collecting tariffs for farm irrigation and other business and industry uses. Tariffs would be enforced through a new Water Resource Act.

 

In the volume-based billing system, water costs would range from Bt0.5 per cubic metre of water for agriculture and animal husbandry, Bt1-Bt3 per cubic metre for tourism-oriented businesses, restaurants, and recreation businesses, and more than Bt3 per cubic metre for large-scale use such as large farms, industry, and power generation.

 

Economics lecturer Decharut Sukkumnoed from Kasetsart University, is concerned that the seemingly sensible approach would end up further hurting already struggling farm families. Collecting a water bill from farmers would intensify their financial difficulties by generating a new expense at a time when increased farming costs and decreased crop prices are already resulting in deficits among small farmers.

 

“This policy will be a huge blow for the farmers, especially for rice farmers, because they have already suffered from deficits in selling rice. The cost for planting rice is increasing, while the rice price is plummeting,” Decharut said.

 

He questioned how the government would gauge the amount of water tapped by each user and calculate an appropriate price. Irrigated water is delivered in a different way from tap water, making it very hard to measure how much water a particular farm uses.

 

Moreover, Decharut asked what the government would do with the collected water tariff fee, which could run as high as Bt50 billion per year.

 

“I suggest that if the government wants to improve the water use efficiency, they could do so without harming the farmers,” he said. For example, the government could create positive incentives that encourage users to more efficiently use water rather than hit them with a water tax, or could promote use of efficient technology and make it widely available for all.

 

“Overall, I think that this measure is too tough on farmers and there is no guarantee that it would work to conserve water.”

 

A farmer from Yasothon Duangchai Chancharoen feared that farmers would incur even further debt if the policy is implemented, adding to the current financial distress caused by high costs of planting rice but low selling prices. “Many people in my village are very concerned about this news. We are already suffering from low rice price and we barely get any profit from planting rice,” Duangchai said.

 

“And even though our village has access to irrigated water, we often do not get that water because we are at the end of an irrigation canal. Our people rely heavily on rainwater. This makes us wonder how the government will calculate the water usage fee in our case.”

 

Worasart is convinced that his government’s proposal would improve the country’s water management. Economic impacts on farmers could be avoided by invoking Article 47 of new Water Resource Bill to waive water bills for those who did not benefit from using water, he said.

 

BOX:

Irrigation water prices 

Bt0.5 per cubic metre of water:

50-1,000 rai paddy fields

50-1,000 rai sugar cane plantations

25-200 rai fruit orchards

20-200 rai vegetable farms

10-50 rai fish farms

20-200 cows

5,000-20,000 chickens

30-1,000 pigs

1,000-50,000 ducks

Bt1-Bt3 per cubic metre of water:

Tourism industry, hotels, recreational activities, restaurants

Bt3 per cubic metre of water:

Golf courses, small-scale power generation, tap water 

More than Bt3 per cubic metre of water:

Large-scale farming and industry, large-scale power generation, other large-scale businesses that use large amounts of water per the National Water Resource Committee

Source: Water Resource Department

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30328162

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-10-02

Taskin will live forever in their hearts...

 

If there was ever a way to ensure that Thailand remains divided for another generation, then a tax on water for the rice farmers imposed by the 'Yellow/Green', southern-based politicians will do it.

 

And people wonder why Thaksin and the 'Reds' are popular.

 

Every time I think things couldn't possibly get any stupider...

 

So... Taxing those who already struggle is more logical than making those with huge amount of money pay a fair amount of tax and not try to always avoid it.

 

This is not only happening in Thailand, there is no more middle class in many places and even people with jobs struggle to make ends meet. But I guess one day the suffering majority will say no more of this and start to fight.

 

They hurt the base and they wonder why they can't win in fair elections...

Edited October 1, 20178 yr by fab99

What has been an appalling time to be a Thai farmer these last few years now appears to be about to get even worse.

Talk about kicking somebody when they're down.

Many countries have water problems.  They deal with it by building reservoirs.  A tax is not a solution, and will only bring about animosity which already exists in volumes. 

Sounds like they are getting closer to corporate takeover, total government regulation, force the little farmers out.  Not uncommon around the world, but I smell a big corporation kickback and manipulation

Would it not make more sense to provide farmers, industry, etc. with grants/loans to build rain water storage tanks? Water harvesting has to be promoted in countries which suffer from water shortages. The money the farmers, industries, etc. save in water bills can be used to repay the grants/loans.

Edited October 2, 20178 yr by djayz
Subjuct - verb agreement

this will have the poor thai farmers salivating

I don't see the problem that people have to pay for using water that is provided to them. This is not aimed at poor farmers at all. If you look at the tax proposal details you see that only those with 50 rai or more will have to pay. Those are not small farmers at all.

 

If the 50 billion collected is used to better water management and combat flooding it would be a blessing to have a law like this. It would of course not be good for the bigger farmers, but those are most often not poor farmers. I don't think that many poor farmers have 50 rai. 

Thailand seems to either have too much water or not enough water. maybe if they spent more time on water control they would have less issues. Way global warming is going the farmers will be trying to give some water back.

4 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Thailand seems to either have too much water or not enough water. maybe if they spent more time on water control they would have less issues. Way global warming is going the farmers will be trying to give some water back.

 

That is why they want more tax income.. so they can make more infrastructure. Its so mean to ask those who benefit from the infrastructure to pay for it. Again this is not about poor farmers because they don't have to pay only if they have more then 50 rai. 

Just now, robblok said:

Its so mean to ask those who benefit from the infrastructure to pay for it

Yes, just like the population benefits from subs for an imaginary sea war

1 minute ago, RichardColeman said:

Yes, just like the population benefits from subs for an imaginary sea war

Subs are a bad deal and have nothing to do with this, now they are asking people who benefit from infrastructure to pay for it. Totally different. And again, its not about small farmers because most small farmers don't have 50 rais of rice. 

Some farmers this year were asked to sow and harvest early to enable their fields to be used for flooding/storage of excess water. I would like to think they could charge the government for this service.

12 minutes ago, Muhendis said:

Some farmers this year were asked to sow and harvest early to enable their fields to be used for flooding/storage of excess water. I would like to think they could charge the government for this service.

I have read they get money for that service (and so they should)

2 hours ago, fab99 said:

there is no more middle class in many places and even people with jobs struggle to make ends meet. But I guess one day the suffering majority will say no more of this and start to fight.

Yesterday was the best day to kill a banker. 

If farmers have to pay the government for water, the government must guaranty supply when need by the farmers!

All down to planned water storage. A reservoir of a couple of square miles but only six feet deep is about as much good as a chocolate teapot. Water management is almost non-existent, as is proved year after year by the floods in Bangkok and other known vulnerable places. Could they ever organise a visit to the toilet for a person with diarrhea? Very doubtful.

Someone has to pay for those submarines...

Taxing Thai farmers for water. That's a novel idea but why stop there. As well as taxing them for rain that falls from the sky why not tax them for the sunlight from above as well. That all helps grow their products and they could impose a fee for say a nominal 8 hours per day. What about those farmers who have a windmill for pumping well water. Why not tax them for the wind they use?

I can't understand why the military deep thinkers haven't thought of this before. Money for old rope!

5 hours ago, fab99 said:

So... Taxing those who already struggle is more logical than making those with huge amount of money pay a fair amount of tax and not try to always avoid it.

 

This is not only happening in Thailand, there is no more middle class in many places and even people with jobs struggle to make ends meet. But I guess one day the suffering majority will say no more of this and start to fight.

 

They hurt the base and they wonder why they can't win in fair elections...

Well it's going the same way than in other countries,,,The Rich get Richer and the Poor getting Poorer,,,

Oops... Just planted several thousand bananas.

Funny thing is its only my family that pay for water anyway. No other farmers do and if your not lazy like most thais that want everything for free its affordable.

Our neighbours complain we steal all the water from them like theres not enough which is lunacy but we are the only people that pay in the whole community as everyone else has diverted un metered pipes or just takes truck loads direct from the main tanks. 

I say tax the hell out of them! TAX THE AIR ALSO. ITS BEING WASTED!

More than Bt3 per cubic metre of water:

Large-scale farming and industry, large-scale power generation, other large-scale businesses that use large amounts of water per the National Water Resource Committee

Source: Water Resource Department

As quoted in The Nation article.

 

"large-scale power generation"  Will this mean that electricity prices will increase ?

7 hours ago, over it said:

Taskin will live forever in their hearts...

No in their farts... 

Free water for submarines though!!

3 hours ago, lamecn said:

If farmers have to pay the government for water, the government must guaranty supply when need by the farmers!

Good luck with that. During the last drought we had 6 months with no water but were still billed the standing charge on our domestic supply.

Edited October 2, 20178 yr by edwinchester

4 minutes ago, wirat69 said:

Free water for submarines though!!

 

We diid get a very nice dam this past year for 1500baht government paid the rest(we got an exceptional dam as the MIL feed the workers lunch and we had a few beers for the end of the day, farmer down the road complained as ours was so good asked if he looked after the workers, no was the reply) so at least they have had some thought about water conservation(and yes it is now full).

4 hours ago, Cadbury said:

Taxing Thai farmers for water. That's a novel idea but why stop there. As well as taxing them for rain that falls from the sky why not tax them for the sunlight from above as well. That all helps grow their products and they could impose a fee for say a nominal 8 hours per day. What about those farmers who have a windmill for pumping well water. Why not tax them for the wind they use?

I can't understand why the military deep thinkers haven't thought of this before. Money for old rope!

Rain that falls from the sky is not taxed, but it is rarely sufficient. Rain that falls elsewhere has to be collected, stored and distributed, which costs money. Is asking those with larger farms to contribute too much?