The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Free National Movement (FNM) last night branded approval of Grand Bahama Power Company’s base rate increase as “counter productive” for making it more difficult to attract investment.

The Opposition, which holds a majority of three out of five Grand Bahama seats in the House of Assembly, blasted the go-ahead given by the Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA), the utility’s regulator, as “inconsiderate” given that many businesses and residents were still struggling to recover from the devastation inflicted by Hurricane Dorian and COVID-19.

Describing the decision as “deeply disappointing”, FNM said: “Grand Bahamians in the last few months have had to endure increased VAT costs on breadbasket items and medication, increased inflation causing a rise in the cost of living, and the increase in construction costs with VAT added to construction services.

“The GBPA has approved the rate case application that will increase electricity costs by 3.3 percent. While the regulator claims to have conducted public consultation, the majority of Grand Bahamians were not able to have their views heard. In addition, the vast majority of Grand Bahamians that had the opportunity were absolutely opposed to any rate increase at this time.”

The FNM added: “Grand Bahama’s economy continues to struggle through recovery which requires new and increased investment. One of the largest impediments to investment has been the cost of electricity on Grand Bahama. This decision is counter-productive and will make it even more difficult to attract and expand investment.

“While we are sympathetic to the economic plight of GB Power, we are even more mindful of the struggling residents and businesses fighting their own economic challenges and this increase will only be another blow to the island’s recovery.”

The GBPA, in a statement confirming the approval, said the final approval had slashed the rate increase by 47 percent compared to the original proposal. And, trying to further appease GB Power’s customers, it said the revised electricity rate structure’s implementation has been pushed back until April 1, 2022.

“GBPA worked diligently with its utility expert consultant and GB Power, which resulted in a revision of the original application. We are pleased to say the final filing has resulted in notably decreased numbers, with a reduction to 53 percent of the original filing,” the Port Authority said in a statement.

“On January 14, GBPA communicated its approval to GB Power of the revised application and reduced base rate increase to 3.3 percent. Furthermore, the implementation of any increase has been deferred to April 1, 2022, to ease the roll-out impact for customers.

“GB Power, in their projected five-year plan has committed to [getting] 15 percent of its generation from renewable sources by 2026, and proposes to invest over $80m in capital improvements, which include a 5MW (Mega Watt) solar plant and battery storage, as well as other improvements in generation and transmission and distribution.”

It remains unclear how the Government will respond to the GB Power approval. A Cabinet committee met last November to discuss GB Power’s planned rate increase, and met with the GBPA to inform it the “Cabinet will not support a rate increase on any portion of the customer base at this time”.

The Cabinet committee featured three ministers with strong Grand Bahama connections. Besides Ginger Moxey, minister for Grand Bahama, they include her predecessor, Dr Michael Darville, now minister of health and wellness, and Obie Wilchcombe, minister of social services and urban development, who is also MP for West End and Bimini.

The committee’s other members include Alfred Sears, minister of works and utilities, who has responsibility for Bahamas Power & Light (BPL), and Ryan Pinder, the attorney general.

Mr Clint Watson said: “We are waiting for the 45-day review process the Power Company is going through and we will see what their outcome is. It is our hope it is stayed. The committee has been very clear and very vocal in talking to the Port Authority about its position, and our position remains just that.”