The Tribune

“WSC is committed to improving service reliability and efficiency, and while there will be periods where that service is compromised, we continue to move forward with the necessary improvements to minimize those occurrences.”

– Statement on water rationing issued by the Water and Sewerage Corporation

By PACO NUNEZ

Tribune News Editor

pnunez@tribunemedia.net

THE Water and Sewerage Corporation has complained about the “misleading” way in which The Tribune took it to task for continuing to allow $16 million worth of water to literally slip through the cracks each year.

Specifically, the WSC is upset at being described as “unable to explain” why the water losses continue to rise, growing significantly of late.

In all fairness, perhaps this phrase was inaccurate. Technically, we should have said the WSC was either unable to account for the recent water loss surge, or didn’t bother to offer any explanations it might have.

Now, the corporation admits that water losses have been “steadily increasing” for decades, and does offer many reasons why this situation has come about.

But that was never the question.

The question was – and continues to be – when and why did this steady, predictable growth in leakage, turn into losses that suddenly “increased rather significantly”, in the words of WSC general manager Glen Laville.

Perhaps they consider the difference between “steady” (firmly fixed, not faltering or wavering; controlled) and “significantly” (very much, greatly, hugely), to be too small to notice.

But it makes a big difference to the public. For us, the recent upsurge in losses means water rationing yet again.

It means no more showers at the end of a long night shift, no more early morning gardening.

It means entire loads of laundry stained red, ruined. Inflated bills as we run the meter to expel air and rust from our pipes following every service interruption.

For us, it means an infringement on our personal life – the injection of annoyance and inconvenience into our daily routine by an entity we pay – and pay far too much – to provide us with what is supposed to be a basic service.

But put this sudden and still mysterious “significant increase” aside for a moment.

I said WSC has offered explanations for the water loss problem in general, but are these satisfactory?

For one thing, we’ve never been told why our pipes began leaking in the first place.

Was it the result of neglect, lack of regular maintenance? Were substandard materials used when the system was first installed?

Or did the materials reach the end of their natural life, but were not replaced when they should have been?

Was it all of the above?

The corporation does helpfully point out that the losses have been growing for decades, and can’t be fixed overnight.

But come to think of it, no one ever told us why the problem was allowed to grow to the point where it costs the public $16 million a year, and now a further $81 million to fix – money desperately needed for school repairs, employment programmes, the fight against crime.

Surely someone could have taken action back when it was only costing us say. . . $2 million a year. Before it got the point where WSC’s service losses rose to 30 times – 30 TIMES – those of a properly run utility.

And what about this $81 million repair project?

In its statement, the corporation complains that The Tribune’s article misled in suggesting some reduction in water losses should have been seen by now, as “the first 10 months of the project were dedicated to performing the necessary studies and analysis.”

But the contract was signed in February of last year. What has been happening for the last seven months?

Nor has anyone explained the complete lack of impact from the expansion to the Baillou Hills desalination plant.

Last week, the corporation’s position was that the plant is producing just fine, but that water losses have grown to the point that rationing must take place regardless.

But back when the expansion was first announced, a representative of the Water and Sewage Corporation promised that it will “translate into an improved, more reliable water supply system for our New Providence customers.”

If the increase in water losses are indeed “steady” couldn’t anyone have predicted that by the time it was up and running, the 4 million extra gallons a day from Baillou Hills would have no impact whatsoever?

WSC’s statement of complaint offers this rather smug observation: “Consecutive governments have been supportive of the efforts and challenges that the corporation faces. The improvements that are being made are required in the national interest and targeted to national development.

But the chairman of the FNM is himself asking how the corporation can now be rationing water after his party’s government spent millions of dollars on repairs to its desalination plant in 2011.

Darron Cash also agreed that “not enough progress” has been made since the signing of the repair contract, and blamed it on a “business as usual” attitude at WSC.

“Moreover, the shortage of water supply is difficult to understand given the inauguration of the new Baillou Hills desalination plant in 2011 and the particularly heavy rains experienced in New Providence during the past two months which would have considerably enhanced the island’s water table,” he added.

According to Mr Cash, at the end of the day, “prudent oversight and management of the corporation’s business” is the thing that’s really lacking.

The bosses at Water and Sewerage may think they have explained things, but their explanations up to this point are just not good enough.

And on top of everything else, these well paid, high ranking civil servants have failed to give an account of their own performance – or done anything to dispel the feeling that they might not actually know what’s going on either.

What do you think?

Email questions or comments to: pnunez@tribunemedia.net or join the conversation on http://www.tribune242.com/news/opinion/insight/