Mr. Paul McGowan:

In regard to the free allowances, the Deputy is correct. The original direction from the Minister mentioned 38,000 litres, or such other number based on available data. I think we have published the analysis carried out in deriving the 21,000 litre free allowance for children. We will continue to monitor this area and publish the results of our monitoring. There is no issue in that regard. The 21,000 litre figure is based on an analysis of 3,000 households in a period running from November 2013 to August 2014. We are confident that the figure is based on the best available data. We did not have that confidence in regard to the 38,000 litre figure which was based on a decade-old report based on UK consumption levels and not necessarily based on average consumption rather than the highest level of consumption for children. The 21,000 litre allowance is based on the most accurate figures available to us in terms of average consumption by children.

It is very important that we use the best available data because the policy is clear that the water used by children is free. If we had stuck with the 38,000 litres or another number, we would effectively have been imposing a cross-subsidy from adults to children or vice versa; in that situation we would not have been complying with our duty.
With regard to charging for adult students, the position is clear that the entitlement to the free allowance is based on the PPS number and the payment of child benefit. It is only those in receipt of child benefit who can claim a child allowance. That is legal position, which is reflected in the charging.
The final question was related to the 40% discount for the non-domestic sector. It is important to point out that from the start we made it clear we were addressing domestic charges first. We have a huge body of work to undertake to ascertain the situation regarding charging in the non-domestic sector. However, in the meantime we recognised that there could be a possible inequity if water was subject to a notice declaring it unfit for human consumption; therefore, we made an exception in the case of the non-domestic sector and introduced the 40% discount. If we had stuck with our original position, we would not have made any change in the case of the non-domestic sector.