The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss some of the arguments for and against the imposition of user pays principle (UPP) charges for government services. The UPP policy is gaining popularity as governments attempt to make those receiving individual benefit accountable for the expense of that benefit.
             This paper analyses the arguments that a UPP system ensures more accountability and responsibility, assists in the management of scarce resources such as water, assists in traffic management, reduces price undercutting by the public sector and aids the achievement of the economic goal of efficiency.
             It goes on to discuss the arguments that a UPP system does not guarantee funds are directed where they are intended, it impedes the achievement of the goals of competition and efficiency, leads to declining education standards, prevents society form advancing, increases poverty, reduces access to adequate health care for the underprivileged and discourages the use of some services that needs to encouraged.
             The paper concludes with the acceptance that a UPP system has both benefits and costs and needs to be carefully managed to ensure a fair and equitable society is maintained and elitism is avoided.
             Governments worldwide are adopting the user-pays principle (UPP) in relation to many and services. The principle involves those actually using or consuming services paying for those services where those services might have previously been available without charge. A key element is that the benefit of the service is to the individual, not the general public, as in tertiary education, for example.
             There are many arguments for and against this principle. Some say the UPP system promotes more responsibility and accountability in relation to the environment and the consumption of increasingly scarce resources. Others argue that a UPP system promotes and elitist system where only those who can afford to pay can have access to...