Thursday, November 26, 2009

To what extent has WASCO already been privatised?

..............................
Posted by at

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I disagree with you Chass. Producing bottled water is not the answer to WASCO's problems. It might even backfire. WASCO is producing water well below its true value and its production and distribution costs. WASCO must first eliminate waste in its system. Too much of the water it produces does not reach the consumer and too much of the water that reaches the consumer is not paid for. We can survive without electricity but not without water. Yet WASCO's arrears are several times higher than LUCELEC. This shouldn't be if we claim "water is life". Some of the people who oppose WASCO's privatization are the same people who would not want to pay more for water.

There are parts of WASCO's operations that can be privatized without fully privatizing the company itself. At the very least WASCO should examine outsourcing some of its operations. One way WASCO can reduce its cost is by sharing meter reading and billing costs with LUCELEC. The two companies might explore setting up a company for this purpose. Addtionally, a separate water company could be set up for the south where capitalizations costs are extremely high and cannot be met by the Government alone. The privitazation model considered by the GOvernment may have been faulty but that does not diminish the true merits of privatization.

November 26, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Anonymous said...

I have been the managing director of a mineral water plant in Spain. Indeed Michael is right aboout the quality. There are too many brands of bottled water competing in St. Lucia. Resulting in a price war to get shelf space in the Super J's a.o. The suppliers earn almost nothing or are even selling at cost and below. The supermarket is the only place that is making good profit on this product.Not only in St. Lucia, but also in many other countries.

November 27, 2009 at 1:59 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)