Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: Politics often prevent elected officials from investing in water utilities

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 04:53, 10 December 2007 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Supporting evidence)
← Previous diff
Current revision (06:28, 29 June 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(Parent debate)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
==Parent debate== ==Parent debate==
-*[[Debate:Water Privatisation]]+*[[Debate: Water privatization]]
- +*[[Resolved: Water should be considered national property]]
==Supporting evidence== ==Supporting evidence==
*[http://www.reason.org/pbrief17.html Reason Public Policy Institute. "Policy Brief 17: Opening the Floodgates: Why Water Privatization Will Continue". August 2001] - "Lack of Political Will. It 's often difficult for local officials to commit to making the necessary investments in community water systems. Water pipes and sewer mains are not visible and not perceived as immediately critical for adequate funding. It is easier for elected officials to ignore them in favor of expenditures for more visible services, such as police and fire. Additionally, water and sewer rates do not adequately cover the actual cost of providing services in many municipalities-but raising water and sewer rates to cover operations and maintenance as well as capital replacement is an unpopular move for elected officials." *[http://www.reason.org/pbrief17.html Reason Public Policy Institute. "Policy Brief 17: Opening the Floodgates: Why Water Privatization Will Continue". August 2001] - "Lack of Political Will. It 's often difficult for local officials to commit to making the necessary investments in community water systems. Water pipes and sewer mains are not visible and not perceived as immediately critical for adequate funding. It is easier for elected officials to ignore them in favor of expenditures for more visible services, such as police and fire. Additionally, water and sewer rates do not adequately cover the actual cost of providing services in many municipalities-but raising water and sewer rates to cover operations and maintenance as well as capital replacement is an unpopular move for elected officials."
-[http://www.thesouthasian.org/archives/2004/water_to_privatize_or_not_to_p.html "Water: to privatize or not to privatize." The South Asian. February 27, 2004] - "Water Pricing Issues. Water and sewer rates do not adequately cover the actual cost of providing services in many municipalities ― but raising rates to cover operations and maintenance as well as capital replacement is an unpopular move for elected officials."+*[http://www.thesouthasian.org/archives/2004/water_to_privatize_or_not_to_p.html "Water: to privatize or not to privatize." The South Asian. February 27, 2004] - "Water Pricing Issues. Water and sewer rates do not adequately cover the actual cost of providing services in many municipalities ― but raising rates to cover operations and maintenance as well as capital replacement is an unpopular move for elected officials."

Current revision

Parent debate

Supporting evidence

  • Reason Public Policy Institute. "Policy Brief 17: Opening the Floodgates: Why Water Privatization Will Continue". August 2001 - "Lack of Political Will. It 's often difficult for local officials to commit to making the necessary investments in community water systems. Water pipes and sewer mains are not visible and not perceived as immediately critical for adequate funding. It is easier for elected officials to ignore them in favor of expenditures for more visible services, such as police and fire. Additionally, water and sewer rates do not adequately cover the actual cost of providing services in many municipalities-but raising water and sewer rates to cover operations and maintenance as well as capital replacement is an unpopular move for elected officials."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.