THE SUNDAY GLEANER, MARCH 6, 2022 A8 OPINION & COMMENTARY EDITORIAL THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: (876) 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published PUBLIC AFFAIRS ITS PLAN to allow a dual track approach to projects apart, the Caribbean Community’s (CARICOM) potentially most consequential initiatives in recent times must be its plan to slash the community food import bill by a quarter within three years – or “25 by ‘25”, as the proposal has been dubbed. But this worthy idea, which received final endorsement from the community’s leaders at their summit in Belize last week, highlights a critical weakness in CARICOM – how it keeps its citizens in the dark about details of its projects and plans. Usually, the community speaks about them in broad sweeps, absent of key underpinnings and data. The upshot: an inability by interested people, other than government bureaucrats and favoured private sector leaders, to offer critical analyses of the programmes. Fixing this flaw, as this newspaper previously advised her, must be a priority of CARICOM’s still new secretary general, Carla Barnett. She has already had six months in the job, fast approaching the time when the tenure of managers becomes well defined. The irony of CARICOM’s lack of popular engagement was obvious at the post-summit press conference in Belize. Barbados’ prime minister, Mia Mottley, who is responsible for single market issues in the community’s quasi-cabinet and chairs a committee overseeing new initiatives, urged buy-in from the region’s population for the agriculture project, for which Guyana’s president, Irfaan Ali, has the lead. At the summit, Dr Ali briefed his colleagues on the scheme – providing, according to Belize’s prime minister, Johnny Briceño, “a sort of matrix” of the types of crops that could be grown as substitutes for imports, the amount of land it will require, the technology to be employed and the investment needed for the venture. Indeed, Ms Mottley disclosed that Dr Ali will host an investment conference in Georgetown on May 19 to 21 “where we are seeking to bring together both the public and private sectors in order to determine what the investment opportunities are”. NOT MADE PUBLIC Yet, neither Dr Ali’s presentation nor the background studies that informed it, are public. They can’t be found – at least not in this newspaper’s search – on the website of the CARICOM secretariat, except for references to the initiative in the post-conference communiqué. Mr Briceño did, however, said at the Belize press conference that Dr Ali’s matrix and analysis could be made available to journalists. The larger issue, though, is that this initiative isn’t new. The core idea stretches far back to the 1970s Regional Food Plan and various iterations since then. The matter, though, now has greater urgency in the context of global warming, disruption in global supply chains and rising food prices. In Jamaica it is particularly poignant at this time in the face of the consideration being given by the Government to suspending CARICOM’s common external tariff (CET), as well as domestic duties, on chicken meat, one of the foods being given priority attention under the initiative. Up-to-date figures on CARICOM’s imports aren’t readily available, but up to 2016, based on data from only 12 of the 15 members, the bill was US$21.5 billion. Significantly, however, five years earlier, the import figure for the entire 15-member community was US$24.4 billion. However, until the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic, overall imports would have grown in the post-2011 period as regional economies recovered, albeit slowly, from the Great Recession of 2008. Expansion in tourism would have helped to drive that growth, especially for foods, which is estimated to have reached around US$6 billion on the eve of the pandemic, or 25 per cent of the 2016 import bill. FOOD IMPORT BILL Jamaica, with a pre-COVID-19 food import bill hovering at around US$1 billion, or a quarter of the island’s imports, would have accounted for approximately 17 per cent of what CARICOM spent buying food from abroad. Domestic analysts, including government agricultural officials, have estimated that Jamaica could displace up to a fifth of its food imports with domestically grown substitutes. That possibility is roughly in line with CARICOM’s expectation under its “25 by ’25” strategy. Significantly, too, as this newspaper has consistently noted, slashing the food bill by 20 per cent would release more than J$30 billion for possible investment in the domestic economy, a chunk of which finds its way into financing new areas of agriculture and value-added production. The poultry industry could be one of those sectors – as was noted by Prime Minister Mottley. Currently, the Barbadian leader noted, CARICOM imports US$200 million worth of chicken meat annually. The region could readily develop the capacity to meet its full requirement, if it could supply the feeds. The feed component accounts for up to 70 per cent of the cost of producing poultry. Growing the feeds regionally, however, would require 25,000 hectares of land for corn and soybeans, which Guyana has offered. But other states, including Belize and Suriname with their significant land mass, as well as Jamaica, would also be looked to for the production of these and other crops. Jamaica’s endorsement of the regional food initiative, and the centrality of the poultry sector in the plan, raises questions of how much the agricultureminister, PearnelCharles Jr, knewwhen he broached the possibility of suspending tariffs on chicken meat to allow competition with domestic producers to attack food inflation, and whether, in doing so, he had the imprimatur of PrimeMinister AndrewHolness. CARICOM leaders have, for long, talked a lot about growingmore of what the region consumes. Relatively little has been done. Prime Minister Mottley was right about what needs to happen to move the needle this time. She said: “... it requires political will and requires bringing together the complexities of the issues – from insurance in a climate crisis, to access to financing … to the removal of (trade) barriers, to technology and to access to land.” Jamaica should note the last bit. The island’s “most fertile ... A-1 soil”, which is Bernard Lodge, St Catherine, shouldn’t be planted with concrete to grow new cities. It should be left for agriculture. Elizabeth Bennett Marsh Guest Columnist WHOSE SIDE are you on, OUR? This refrain comes in various forms from utility customers and is often echoed in mainstream and social media. Public comments on the perceived role of the OUR, especially following an announcement of a utility tariff decision, have not escaped the regulator’s scrutiny, even while it has, on many occasions, sought to remind the public of its powers and obligations under the OUR Act and other sector-specific legislations. There is seemingly a misperception held by utility consumers that the OUR was set up solely to secure only their rights and interests. From this perspective, it is sometimes assumed that the OUR should only make decisions that cater to the consumers’ most pressing expectations, notwithstanding the prevailing circumstances. Some utility consumers are of the view that in these harsh economic times, the OUR must ‘read the room’ when making decisions, and act accordingly. Meaning that the OUR should only take into consideration the difficulties being experienced by customers arising from loss of wages, increases in the cost of living, downturn in business, volatile global prices, etc. ROLE AND MANDATE Is the OUR obliged to do so? Is it a consumer advocacy body? These questions bring into sharp focus the role and mandate of the OUR. Consumer advocacy is the protection and promotion of the welfare and rights of consumers. A consumer advocacy body – usually a lobby group – is the voice of consumers on policy matters and other decisions that impact them and their well-being. The OUR began operations in 1997 with a mandate to provide effective regulation of utility services. This kind of regulation is fundamental to the well-being of people in modern society and entails ensuring that consumers have access to modern, safe, reliable, affordable, and quality utility services while providing the opportunity for utilities or service providers to make a reasonable return on their investment. The OUR’s mandate includes establishing and maintaining transparent and objective rules for the regulation of utility services, advising the government on utility matters as required, making recommendations on service supply licence applications, and ensuring that utility consumers enjoy an acceptable quality of service at a reasonable cost. The OUR, being an independent and impartial economic regulator, operates under the constraints of various legislations and licences which detail clear objectives, powers and procedural obligations as well as define the scope and scale of what it is empowered to do. For example, the ElectricityAct, 2015, sets out clear guidelines on when the Jamaica Public Service Company Limited (JPS) can submit tariff review applications to the OUR, and the parameters within which such applications should be assessed by the OUR. The OUR, as a quasi-judicial body, is obliged to make objective decisions based on technical, economic and legally sound reasoning. Therefore, it does not have the latitude to make decisions that are politically or emotionally motivated. Its firm adherence to making decisions, guided by relevant legislative provisions, has resulted in decisions that have proven, largely, to withstand scrutiny whether through public discourse or before a tribunal or a court of law. Arguably, it is out of a collective sense of confidence in the OUR and its decisions, which creates situations where matters that do not fall within its regulatory remit are sometimes referred to it for advice and resolution. So to answer the question posed as to whether the OUR is a consumer advocacy body, it is not. However, the OUR is required to keep regulatory issues in balance. Consequently, it is obliged to consider, among other factors, consumer interest in keeping with the provisions for the protection of consumers set out in the OUR Act, the Telecommunications Act, the National Water Commission Act, the Electricity Act,2015 and the Electricity Licence, 2016. MAJOR DECISIONS In its 25-year history, the OUR has made major, impactful decisions in the interest of consumers. These are just a few: • Developed guaranteed standards for National Water Commission (NWC), JPS and private water providers, which hold these utility providers to basic service standards, and if breached, attracts compensation to affected customers; • Reduced Mobile Termination rates in 2012. These are fees mobile telephone companies charge other carriers to terminate calls on their networks. OUR’s decision resulted in a significant reduction of overall rates charged by the major telecoms companies whether for calls to their network or to another; • Introduced Number Portability in the telecommunications sector in 2015. This places more power in the hands of telecoms customers by allowing them to change their mobile or landline service provider and keep their existing phone numbers. The guidelines are now being reviewed to ensure, among other things, that the interests of customers continue to be protected; • Approved measures in the electricity sector that provide cost-effective options to customers. These include transitioning from a two-period to a three-period Time of Use (TOU) rate regime and the extension of TOU rates to more customer categories, as well as the introduction of prepaid (pay as you go) rates; • Spearheaded international procurement processes to identify over 115MW of renewable energy capacity pursuant to a directive in 2015. The country now has a renewable energy mix of mainly wind and solar plants provided by Wigton Windfarms, Blue Mountain Renewables, WRB Enterprises Content Solar, and Eight Rivers Energy Company. • Played a pivotal role in the modernisation of the electricity sector with the introduction of cheaper and environmentally friendlier natural gas and the replacement of old inefficient oil-fired generating plants with modern gas-fired plants. • Approved a special K-Factor Fund for the NWC. This OURmonitored facility allows the NWC to use a predetermined percentage on customers’ bills to implement non-revenue water (NRW) reduction, sewerage and other specifically approved operational efficiency projects. This fund has assisted the NWC to deal with the shortage of capital that restricted its ability, in the past, to take on critical projects. A sufficient reduction of the NRW should realise more consistency in the water supply including during periods of drought. Despite the OUR not being a consumer advocacy body, it continues to ensure that utility consumers’ interests are always taken into consideration in the decision-making process, and that decisions are made in the best interest of all the stakeholders it serves, as it has been doing for the last 25 years. Elizabeth Bennett Marsh is public education specialist at Office of Utilities Regulation. Send feedback to columns@ gleanerjm.com The Electricity Act, 2015, sets out clear guidelines on when JPS can submit tariff review applications to the OUR, and the parameters within which such applications should be assessed by the OUR. OUR provides regulatory balance CARICOM’s food plan seems sound initiative
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUzNTI=