The minister's call for bench-marking of water supply companies is indeed timely. Based on figures from the Water Industry Guide 2003, some water companies are well-managed whereas others have sprung major leaks that the companies are unable, or unwilling, to repair.

Given that water management is not rocket science, the government should delve deeper into why some companies have managed to become so inept at managing a resource that should be easy to harness in a tropical country that enjoys adequate rainfall.

The rankings are based on the cheapest price charged to consumers. Kelantan and Penang charge the same price (2001 rates) but Penang is ranked higher as an efficient operator as it managed to get a 36 percent return.

It is worth noting that some states (Kedah and Melaka) can still make a reasonable margin even though they have not reviewed their prices since the early 90s. I believe Melaka improved their management after their water crisis several years ago when they even considered hiring 'rain dancers'. Johor is charging exorbitant rates, perhaps being the latest beneficiary of the privatisation mindset.

If we are going to benchmark, we should examine how these companies reward management for superior performance or the lack thereof. If Johor had been allowed to charge only RM0.68 (the next highest rate, charged by Negri Sembilan) it would also be in the loss-making category.

One drastic measure to improve our management of water resources is to allow a profitable entity to take control of a loss-making one and replace inefficient managers with staff who can make things right. For example, Negri Sembilan and Melaka can combine and take over Selangor's operations.

Another method to analyse the performance of these leaking companies is to check their performance before and after privatisation. If managers have been inept, they should be speedily replaced so that consumers can enjoy the bountiful water that should be available.