Sewage treatment fees should not rise How to supervise sewage treatment costs?

The news that Guangzhou City raised the cost of urban sewage treatment was released, which caused a strong response from the citizens of Guangzhou. Many people think that water prices have risen again and again, while the urban water environment has not improved significantly, and they are resolutely opposed to rising water prices. What standard should the sewage treatment fee be collected? What is the relationship between the sewage treatment plant and the urban water environment? Can the board with no improvement in the urban water environment be hit by the sewage treatment plant? Relevant experts have interpreted this.

 

On December 17, 2008, Guangzhou City proposed two plans for urban sewage treatment fee reform, which increased on the basis of the existing 0.7 yuan/ton (according to 90% of water consumption), with an average increase of 74.29% and 85.71% respectively. Once this proposal was put forward, it was highly concerned by the public and the community. Regarding the standard of sewage treatment fees should be collected, how much is enough to make up for the cost of sewage treatment, the relationship between sewage treatment costs and environmental standards, and what kind of interest game exists among the government, enterprises and consumers. The author interviewed Renmin University of China. Professor Song Guojun, Dr. An Shumin, and Professor Fu Tao, Director of the Water Research Center of Tsinghua University, Department of Environmental Economics and Management.

 

How to supervise the cost of sewage treatment?

 

Need to establish a third-party evaluation system for costs

 

According to the opinion poll conducted by the Guangzhou Social Situation and Public Opinion Center, "70% of the citizens do not approve of price increases." At the hearing held on December 30, 2008, representatives from all sides held opinions and debated whether sewage treatment charges should be reformed and how to reform. Among the 26 representatives who attended the meeting, 21 representatives agreed to raise the price, only 5 opposed, and 18 representatives favored the gradient price increase plan.

 

Professor Song Guojun believes that the operation of sewage treatment plants is a public utility with high stability and relatively low profit margin. Therefore, the policy stipulates that the pricing principle of “guarantee the profit margin” is also accepted by sewage treatment enterprises. The nature of the natural monopoly of public utilities determines that the cost information of sewage treatment plants needs to be disclosed to the government and the public, and its operational performance needs to be supervised by the government and the public.

 

However, how to supervise the sewage treatment cost and calculate the charge level is more professional and complicated. The sewage treatment in different regions may cause different costs due to the influent water quality, equipment, process flow, and supporting pipe network. The professional accounting process is too professional. It is often difficult and does not need to be understood. Therefore, a mechanism for third-party evaluation of costs needs to be established. Song Guojun introduced that the experience of the Netherlands, Italy and other countries is that the consulting company regularly evaluates the cost and performance of the utility and publishes an evaluation report to the public. A hearing will be held based on the results of the assessment.

 

Fu Tao believes that the sewage treatment fee is the administrative fee charged by the government to compensate the government for the cost of pollution control. The essence is the “fee” rather than the “price”; therefore, there is no need to open a price hearing for the adjustment of fees. The sewage treatment fee collection standard is based on cost, but based on the average industry cost, rather than one or some sewage treatment plants, it is not necessary to hold a hearing for some sewage treatment plants.

 

According to Fu Tao, the national standard of 0.8 yuan/ton is the base, which only reflects the cost of sewage treatment, and does not include sludge treatment. If the total cost is included, 0.8 yuan/ton is still not enough. . The increase in sewage treatment fees is a trend.

 

How to evaluate whether the sewage treatment fee is high or low?

 

According to the analysis of the average income level of urban residents and the proportion of sewage treatment fees, it does not completely correspond to the concept of sewage treatment costs.

 

Regarding whether the increase in sewage treatment fees can be used to raise funds for facility construction, Fu Tao believes that although the international sewage treatment fee is mainly used to make up for operating costs, in China, it is in line with the sewage treatment costs to raise funds for the construction of sewage treatment facilities. This is reasonable if the policy stipulates and the local financial strength is weak.

 

An Shumin believes that the amount of sewage treatment fees is determined by the government after considering its own financial capacity and the income level of residents, and does not completely correspond to the concept of sewage treatment costs. Judging whether the level of sewage treatment fees is high or low and there is no uniform standard, it should be based on the average income level of the urban residents and the proportion of sewage treatment fees to water prices. The cost of sewage treatment plant operation (+ profit) = sewage treatment fee + government financial subsidies. Therefore, in terms of raising the sewage treatment fee, the government and the enterprise have the motive of collusion. For the enterprise, the cost of obtaining the “guaranteed profit” from the government is guaranteed by contract. Increasing the sewage treatment fee does not necessarily increase the enterprise. Income; for the government, raising sewage treatment fees can reduce financial burdens.

 

Does the increase in sewage treatment fees mean water quality improvement?

 

Influenced by the managed network, collection rate, etc., simply raising the water fee is not the best policy.

 

Many residents objected to raising sewage treatment fees and believed that the increase in sewage treatment fees did not lead to improvements in water quality. The sewage treatment fee has been raised, and the water quality still cannot satisfy the residents. Does it mean that the standard should be formulated more rigorously or the standard should be formulated from the perspective of human health? In this regard, An Shumin believes that people think that the water quality is not good. Part of the reason is that in some areas where the pipe network is not covered, the sewage does not enter the centralized treatment facilities, which is often a legacy of urban construction; and some are caused by poor supervision.

 

Sewage treatment enterprises have strong smuggling motives for the sake of maximizing profits. Song Guojun also believes that under the public-private partnership model, the cost of supervision of sewage treatment plants is quite high. Only after the supervision is in place to ensure that the sewage treatment plant is stable and up to standard discharge, if the water quality still does not satisfy the public, the national or local standards development department may consider raising the emission standard.

 

Song Guojun also suggested that the ideal sewage treatment fee adjustment model should be institutionalized. The local government may introduce a “method” to stipulate the price adjustment mechanism for sewage treatment fees. For example, when the cost rises beyond a certain range, the enterprise may apply for price adjustment; the enterprise provides the government and the public with the basis for price adjustment; and the third party provides the basis for the enterprise. If the assessment is passed and the basis for the price adjustment is reasonable, the government will organize a hearing; in the method, specific provisions should be made on how the representatives of the hearing should choose and how to vote. All price adjustments and their decision-making processes should be based on policy provisions. Moreover, not only can companies apply for price increases, but if the cost of technology advancement and economies of scale declines beyond a certain margin, the public can also apply for price cuts.

 

If the government needs to raise the charging standard because of financial pressure, the government also needs to disclose the financial status of the public according to the procedures stipulated in the "Measures", provide a persuasive basis, and then hold an administrative fee hearing.

 

The collection of sewage treatment fees should be based on the cost of sewage treatment, which is determined by factors such as the government's financial ability to pay and the average income level of residents. In the interests of enterprises, governments, and consumers, institutional construction and information disclosure are the basis for solving problems.

 

According to the latest report, Guangzhou City adjusted the sewage treatment fee increase according to the opinions of the masses of the hearing, and postponed the new fee to July. After adjustment, the monthly water consumption of each household is less than 22 tons (including 22 tons), and the price adjustment is reduced to 28.57% according to 0.9 yuan/ton, and the sewage volume is calculated based on 90% of the actual water consumption, that is, 1 per use. The sewage treatment fee for tons of water was paid at 0.81 yuan.