Many Goulburn-Murray Water water charges are expected to fall over the next four years, but there is a group of water users who are not completely happy with their treatment by the authority.
G-MW’s next four-year plan on pricing is currently with the state regulator, the Essential Services Commission.
The commission held a public forum in Shepparton on April 23 with only a small number of water users attending.
Unregulated stock and domestic users, mostly from the north-eastern region, raised some issues with the commission and G-MW.
The commission has praised G-MW for its pricing submission but while accepting most of its proposals, the commission did not accept G-MW’s proposed service point fees for unmetered customers.
As a result, G-MW must recalculate these and resubmit its proposal for these tariffs in response to the draft decision.
The commission received 13 submissions from unregulated diverters who raised concerns regarding G-MW’s engagement with them.
Most submissions considered that the business’s pricing proposals and engagement efforts did not address the unique needs and concerns on fees and service point costs for domestic and stock water customers.
In its price submission, G-MW has acknowledged this lack of satisfaction and committed to improve how it communicates with diversion customers, both on the nature of charges and on value for money.
In response to commission requests, G-MW provided the commission with additional information about its engagement with diverters on unregulated waterways, including domestic and stock customer in the Upper Ovens.
The commission said the additional information shows that G-MW reached out to diverters on unregulated waterways including Upper Ovens customers on licence renewals, the development of the service plan for diverters, and during its engagement consultation period.
Cameron Reid, from the Ovens Valley, told Country News the unregulated stock and domestic diverters had experienced big price increases for eight years after 2016 and the commission was advised at the time of these concerns.
“They still did nothing to investigate or regulate prices for our class of customer,” he said.
Mr Reid said the commission employed consultants AITHER to conduct investigations into proposed fees, but AITHER was not asked to look at fees for the unregulated users.
“It was only after the price submission by G-MW to the commission that ESC asked AITHER to investigate further,” he said.
“Time was limited and the report is full of terms such as ‘high level’, ‘assumptions’ and ‘information lacking’.
“ESC and G-MW have had eight years to get this right.”
Mr Reid said during the 2024 review for G-MW prices, the commission directed G-MW to consult with customers in a better way.
“G-MW employed DG Consulting to review the fees and justify by demonstrating costs associated with the fees.
“G-MW could not justify and DGC found that the fees were based on a lot of cost assumptions.”
He said DG Consulting used dismissive terms for the input by unregulated domestic and stock people, such as: ‘no intrinsic value’ and ‘would cost more than it would save’.
During this 2024 period, G-MW has promoted the idea that to separate unregulated customers from other diverters would cost more money than savings it would achieve, Mr Reid said.
“One needs to question this statement. Who would it cost? Who would benefit from savings? Would it in fact remove cross subsidisation?”
The commission is accepting further submissions on the draft decision until May 7.