Pricing proposal to double the cost of rural water, says council

“NSWIC is alarmed by this proposal and urges stakeholders across industries to understand the implications,” Ms Miller said.

“Many stakeholders are not fully informed about the proposed prices, leaving them at risk of being unprepared until it is too late.

“This translates to the typical farmer with a high-security entitlement paying $7924 more each year and the typical general security entitlement holder paying $3840 more each year.

“But WaterNSW’s typical farmer scenario masks IPART’s valley-by-valley pricing scenarios, in which different valleys are facing cumulative price increases of 200 per cent and more over five years.

“These pricing increases are simply unaffordable — they will send family farms and other rural industries using water out of business.”

Ms Miller said the water pricing model in NSW was “fundamentally broken when Rural WaterNSW customers are currently covering 80 to 100 per cent of both operating and capital expenses”.

“Many of these costs are for public good services and activities on behalf of the broader community, such as environmental planning and protection, recreation, cultural and managed environmental flows, and the construction of fishways,” she said.

“It should not fall upon rural water customers to pay for these additional public good services.

“Rural water customers should be charged only to the extent of what it costs to deliver water, and that all other costs associated with water management should be shared across the community via the public purse.”

Landholders using irrigation are also facing higher water allocation prices due to state and Commonwealth environmental water recovery, Ms Miller said.

“Price increases of this magnitude threaten the viability of small and medium family farms, leading to closures of businesses, lost employment, and a decline of industries critical to the economic and social wellbeing of regional communities.”

Ms Miller encouraged all stakeholders to make a submission to the IPART review and make their position clear.