AT FIRST glance, the prospect of a drought in England seems about as likely as that of floods in the Sahara. But the popular perception of Britain as a uniformly dank and sodden island is misleading. The south of the country gets the same amount of rain as parts of Syria, and London is a drier city than Dallas or Istanbul. Recently, the skies have been unusually clear. Months of below-average rainfall (see map) have raised the prospect of a summer drought—the worst for decades in parts of the south-east. Elliot Morley, an environment minister, warned last week of standpipes in the streets.

Ministers (and water companies) are again encouraging everyone to use less water. Despite the sometimes unsavoury nature of the advice offered—Britons have, in the past, been encouraged to refrain from flushing toilets—such exhortations do seem to work: Thames Water, which supplies London and large parts of southern England, reckons that a publicity campaign last year caused a 4% fall in demand.

Economists argue that the best way to encourage people to be more frugal would be to price water properly. Domestic use accounts for 70% of the total, but the price that most consumers pay for water—unlike gas or electricity—bears no relation to how much they use. Instead, costs are fixed according to the value of a house, encouraging over-consumption. OFWAT, the industry economic regulator, water companies and government have all tried to persuade people to install water meters, mainly by holding out the prospect of lower bills.

But the heaviest users, who would end up paying more, have every reason not to switch. “Everyone has always regarded water as a free good,” says Barbara Young, the head of the Environment Agency. Because of that, officials have been reluctant to impose meters on an unwilling population, although there are powers to do so in an emergency (something that Folkestone and Dover Water, one of the worst-affected companies, is trying to do). They are fitted automatically to new homes and can be forced on people when they move house, but take-up has been slow. OFWAT reckons that only around a quarter of homes use metered water.

There are problems on the supply side too. Many blame the water companies for not fixing leaky pipes. These are a big problem, especially in London, where parts of the infrastructure are over 150 years old. Thames Water, which supplies the capital, reckons a third of the water it pumps into the system soaks away into the ground. Part of the problem is that OFWAT, with its duty to keep prices low, is reluctant to approve the price rises needed to fund a proper replacement programme—although Thames plans to spend £1 billion over the next five years patching up and replacing the worst bits of its network.

Frustratingly, none of these worries are new. One of New Labour's first acts after taking office in 1997 was a water summit, chaired by John Prescott, the deputy prime minister, to crack down on leakage and encourage efficient use in the face of rising demand. But progress has been glacial. A voluntary water-efficiency code for housebuilders is only now out for consultation, and Mr Prescott's plans to build half a million new homes in the driest bit of the country have raised eyebrows. Many water firms plan to build new reservoirs, but that will take several years.

In the short run, not much can be done. The rune-readers at the Met Office, Britain's weather-forecasting centre, predict a cold, dry February. Even if the rains return later in the year, they will not help much: greater evaporation and thirstier plants mean that little summer rain makes it into rivers or aquifers. But if a drought persuades officials and users to change some lazy old habits, it may be no bad thing.