All stirred up over drinking water in restaurants
Proposition: Farhan, Izhar, Guoxiang
Opposition: Sheng Yi, Zheyuan, Yechen
Rethink.Women Leaders
16 years ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A noticeboard for the class's EL matters. Please subscribe via web feed or email.
This house believes that restaurants in Singapore should be required by law to serve complimentary water. Complimentary means free of charge and it is to be enforced by the government. This is because customers regardless of whether or not in Singapore do ask for water and want free water. Some restaurants do not serve complimentary water, but instead sell bottled water. However, bottled water is not environmentally friendly. Therefore, complimentary water is required by law. The last point is that this is all part of service and good dining. Serving complimentary water reflects good service and good service attracts customers. This is good for Singapore’s economy. Therefore, restaurants in Singapore should be required by law to serve complimentary water. Water is always asked by customers in all restaurants, and therefore complimentary water should be served in all restaurants.
ReplyDeleteOur team believes that restaurants should not be required by law to serve complimentary drinking water. I will elaborate on the economic reasons why free water should not be mandated by the law. My second speaker, Yechen, will talk about the environmental impacts of serving free water in restaurants, and my third speaker Zheyuan will speak about how free water should not be considered part of good service in restaurants. Firstly, free water is not economical for restaurants, especially privately owned ones. To provide clean tap water, a huge cost is usually incurred. For example, bakerzin installed water filters at all its outlets in order to provide clean free water. The cost incurred was $25,000. This is not economical in the long run. Furthermore, more manpower is required in order to maintain the cleanliness of the cups, thus requiring each worker to do more work, or even hiring more workers, decreasing overall productivity and profitability of the restaurants. Customers should not think of themselves only, and try to understand complications that may arise for the owners of the restaurants. What they see to be one simple cup of water, may actually have far more deeper implications then the so-called ‘few cents’ for that glass of water. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteFirstly I would like to emphasize that good service standard is demanded from Singapore restaurants. And as the word “service implies”, the customer should be prioritized over the restaurant. Restaurants can easily afford to serve free water from the 10% service charge per receipt.
ReplyDeleteNext, water packaged in plastic water is not a green option.
Water sold in plastic bottles is not as safe as tap water because bottled water is allowed to be contaminated by chemicals that cause "reproductive difficulties, liver problems, and cancer."
Marketing hype and inadequate labeling entice consumers to buy bottled water even though it is far more expensive and not shown to be any better than tap water.
Bottled water also takes its toll on the environment. At least 3/4 of the millions of plastic water bottles produced each year are thrown away rather than recycled. Plus, producing bottled water actually uses more water and is far more energy intensive than providing the same amount of water to the public via the tap.
Bottled water contributes to garbage.
Bottled water produces up to 1.5 million tons of plastic waste per year. According to Food and Water Watch, that plastic requires up to 47 million gallons of oil per year to produce. And while the plastic used to bottle beverages is of high quality and in demand by recyclers, over 80 percent of plastic bottles are simply thrown away.
That assumes empty bottles actually make it to a garbage can. Plastic waste is now at such a volume that vast eddies of current-bound plastic trash now spin endlessly in the world's major oceans. This represents a great risk to marine life, killing birds and fish which mistake our garbage for food.
Thanks to its slow decay rate, the vast majority of all plastics ever produced still exist somewhere.
Water is one of the most important resources for human life and it will not last forever. That’s why we must treasure it but not waste it. Water in restaurants should be given only when the diner really in need, I believe that serving free-charge water is really a way of wasting water. As if the diner really needs water, he or she will buy for it. If free-charged water is given to every diner, even if the diner does not really need it, a large quantity of water will be waste. Moreover, even the diner finishes it, more water will be needed to wash the cups. It’s not conservative at all. Think about how many people in world are suffering from water shortage, we should do our part and conserve water as possible as we can. So not serving free-charged water will ensure the diners will drink water only when they really need and it will not waste water.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I would like to rebut on the point that serving tap water is a waste of resources. When buying water, it itself is a waste of water. Also, we can recycle the water which is not drunk by customers such as using it for washing the floor or something. Water can also be served in jugs, and
ReplyDelete...
Serving plain water is all part of good service and dining. Customers have their own specific reasons for asking for a glass of water. And water is secondary to a good dining experience. What is so difficult in serving water? Like in the case of Ms Veron Ang just asked for a cup of TAP water. Is that so difficult to serve? A glass of tap water is not even worth more than 10cents. She did not even ask for bottled branded tap water.
Moving on, I would like to elaborate on the case of Ms. Chua Shuyi. She said that she was so impressed by the good service of providing complimentary water that she would not mind paying for it if it was not for free. This shows that serving complimentary water is part of good service and can attract customers, such as her.
This would not be a loss to restaurants as a whole because it will be attracting customers and I am very sure that having customers patronise the restaurant are worth more than just serving a glass of water. I believe that this is a good enough reason to include complimentary water in good service.
Furthermore, tap water is cheap. The cost incurred was $25,000 for bakerzin to install water filters in all of its outlets. However, this is purified water, not tap water. Customers want tap water. How is it then that serving complimentary water which is very cheap not economical?
In my argument I shall rebut Farhan’s point on the law requiring restaurants to serve complimentary drinks to improve service. Firstly, allow me ask; when you and your family goes to the restaurant to dine in, do you and family patronize the restaurant for the aim of having complimentary drinks? If that is the case then why even bother to dine out in the first place if the objective of eating in a restaurant is not because of the food but instead just for the service of complimentary drink. This defeats the purpose of visiting a restaurant to spend valuable time with your family and let me emphasis, to enjoy the food and service in the restaurant. In the first place, there is no need for the intervention of law on restaurants for them to serve complimentary drinks because it all lays in the service of restaurant not the difference of drinks that is charged or complimentary. As stated from a forum in Straits Time, even if drink is charged she would not mind as it is the service of the restaurant waitress that makes the diners feels the injustice in the charging of water. Thus I emphasis again on my point that it is really the service of restaurant that contributes to the diners’ anger on restaurants not serving complimentary drink and what we need is to improve restaurant servicing and not the establishment of law to require all restaurant in Singapore to serve complimentary drinks. Thank you.
ReplyDeletetheres a reason its called complementary lol....not part of the debate lol
ReplyDeletei mean complimentary*
ReplyDelete