My fellow commentator, James Milnes Gaskell, correctly identifies the dilemma over the NevLec revelations when he asks “Since when did two wrongs make a right”. They never did and they don’t. But with respect to the question that follows: “Shall we again find that upon the next party Government changeover an incoming NRP Administration presents accounts from NevLec showing CCM favorites owing Nevlec vast amounts?” I beg to differ. I would have preferred these three questions.
1 “When are the annual accounts of all Statutory Bodies, certified by a qualified auditor that meets the standard for companies that are listed on the East Caribbean Stock Exchange (ECSE), going to be made available according to the timetable set out for companies listed on the ECSE?” I have repeatedly asked and have repeatedly been told that they are laid in the House but not available to the general public. This must change. We are all stakeholders in statutory corporations. Publishing the annual accounts is a first step in moving towards a more pluralistic form of control of these statutory bodies. Once the accounts are available it will be possible for people trained in reading such accounts to ask pertinent questions. There is no doubt that a massive increase in receivables would be clear to see and large ones would have to be identified. While this may not be what the political elite want it will start the process of not allowing abuse of the sort that has been going on.
2 “Who did, in fact, approve continuation of service to those who had not paid in accordance with the terms of service?” Was it the Chairman of the Board? Was it the Board as a whole? Was it the General Manager? Was it the Chief Financial Officer? Hopefully this wasn’t approved at a level below these. This is a serious question because this abuse shows that whoever did so decide failed in his or her duty to all the stakeholders to act without fear and favor as is required if we are to have these statutory bodies run for all our benefit and not just the political elite in power. The argument that “I was just doing what has always been done” is self serving and inadequate and does not set the tone of requiring those in these important positions to act correctly in the future.
3 “When is the Administration going to introduce procedures that can minimize the possibility that this will happen again?” A Board of Directors that is constituted to represent all of Nevis, rather than the supporters of the party in power, would clearly act as a counter balance to this type of behavior. I have discussed this idea with members of both parties and am told the same thing. The supporters wouldn’t like it. Surely the role of leaders is to lead and to lead in a way that transparently ensures to the greatest extent possible that these vital engines of the economy are managed and led for the benefit of all rather than the narrow interests of the supporters of the party in power.
One final question about the management of Nevlec needs to be asked. Can we see an audit of the calculation of the fuel surcharge? I continue to be troubled by the division of excess fuel costs by Nevlec’s production of electricity which is then multiplied by the total electricity sold (a larger number because of the purchase of electricity from the Wind Farm).
The recently announced reduction of the fuel surcharge by 25% for all residential consumers seems a very unwise decision for an Administration that is cash-strapped. Those with large houses, air conditioners, swimming pools and other such nice to have luxuries are the biggest consumers of electricity so it is a policy that benefits the ‘extractive elite’. A much better policy would be to waive the fuel surcharge on those that really are poor and whose electricity consumption falls below a level to be established. A cash-strapped Administration must spend its limited resources very wisely.
Serious questions about procedures need to be asked about the reported abuse of the NIA governmental payroll. Is the civil service, which presumably prepares the documents to effect the payments, acting in the interest of all of us (which is of course what is hoped) or the political elite of the party in power? Do our civil servants have any rights to question requests for payments or grandiose investments that they believe inappropriate? Is there any form of arbitration available to the civil servants who are asked to do something that they believe inappropriate? Should there be?
We are told that it will not be business as usual. It is time to do more than say it will not be business as usual and put in place policies and procedures that ensure transparency and fairness to all Nevisians.
