Why is everybody assuming that private ownership = higher price? As long as the Government does things properly, it can work out right for the consumer.
I'm thinking a private ownership model based on temporary contracts. If a firm is found to be doing "evil" things (to put it shortly), like hiking prices, or spiking the water, or something, they won't be able to renew their contract in the future. Firms acting in the interest of the people will keep winning future contracts.
Perhaps even allowing public participation in the contract awarding process.
And, yes, whilst it is unethical for people to be "priced out" of drinking water, it is also unethical for water to be handed out for free. Consuming water has a negative effect on other people, and the environment, these costs need to be taken into account, as well as the cost of purifying and delivering the water to you. If water is free, people will over-consume, and that will lead to disruptions in the water cycle.
