Connect with us

Features

Closure of Public Utilities Commission – Cutting off the nose to spite the face?

Published

on

by Dr Janaka Ratnasiri

A news item, in The Island of 03.12.2020, described an attempt being made by the Government to close down the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) and to absorb its technical staff to the Department of National Planning, Ministry of Power and to the Treasury, on a directive of a letter supposedly sent by the President’s Secretary to the Secretary to the Treasury.

 

BUDGET SPEECH 2021 AND LETTER OF PRESIDENT’S SECRETARY

The letter further says the decision was taken in line with the budget proposal referring to the PUCSL and the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) “to create an efficient work environment to implement power generation plans that have remained unimplemented for years”. Though the President’s letter says that this decision was taken, in line with the Budget Speech, what the Budget Speech says is, “I also propose to amend the Public Utilities Commission Act and the Ceylon Electricity Board Act, to allow the rapid implementation of projects”. There is no reference to closing down of the PUCSL in the Budget Speech.

The letter (circulated in social media, and tabled in the Parliament) says that “I am advised to instruct you to take necessary procedural steps to close down and consequent steps to absorb the technical staff to other relevant organizations”. A missing part of this letter is that it does not say who advised the President’s Secretary to send a letter instructing the Treasury’s Secretary to close down the PUCSL. It certainly cannot be the President to make such an unwise, illegal step. Does it mean that the proposal to close down the PUCSL is an initiative of the President’s Secretary or was there a hidden hand behind this move? If that is the case, the President should remove his Secretary rather than closing down the PUCSL.

 

DELAYS IN IMPLEMENTING POWER PROJECTS

While the Budget Speech wants the PUCSL and the CEB Acts to be amended to implement power projects rapidly, the President’s Secretary says the PUCSL has to be closed down to create an efficient work environment, to implement power generation plans, that have remained unimplemented for years. Both documents are trying to put the blame, for delays in implementing power projects and plans, on the PUCSL. In a country, any decisions taken at the highest level should be evidence-based. Otherwise, the country cannot progress. In this instance, both parties are misled and erred in their decisions.

The writer has published extensively on the status of our power sector, in particular on the role of the CEB in causing all these delays. The reader is referred to The Island of 27th and 28th December 2018, and of 28.03.2019, written on this topic. The CEB took over 10 years to finalize plans to build a 500 MW coal power plant, at Sampur, which eventually had to be aborted, partly because of this delay. Then, it took over four years to finalize, awarding a contract to build a 300 MW gas power plant, at Kerawalapitiya, on BOOT basis. The CEB is solely responsible for these delays and they have nothing to do with the PUCSL. The details of these delays are explained in the above two articles.

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE MET BY GENERATION PLANS

The CEB also has to comply with the provisions in the original Sri Lanka Electricity Act No. 20 of 2009, according to which the Minister shall formulate general policy guidelines on generation expansion, taking into consideration the requirements for electricity in Sri Lanka in order to attain national targets for sustainable economic growth, among others. The current policy guidelines, on the Electricity Industry, approved by the Cabinet of Ministers, specifies that 50% of electricity generation has to be met from renewable sources. The National Electricity (Amendment) Act 31 of 2013 indicates that the PUCSL is required to approve the generation plans, prepared regularly by the CEB, before implementing.

The Amended Act also says that any proposals to build a new generation plant shall be based on the Least Cost Long Term Generation Expansion Plan and approved by the PUCSL. The “Least Cost Long-Term Generation Expansion Plan” has been interpreted in the Act as a plan prepared on the basis of least economic cost and meeting the technical and reliability requirements of the electricity network of Sri Lanka which is duly approved by the Commission. Here, the “economic cost” means cost taking into consideration the cost of damage to the environment and human health caused by the generating unit, which are referred to as cost of externalities.

 

DELAYS IN APPROVING THE CURRENT PLANS

When the generation plan is submitted for approval to the PUCSL, it is therefore necessary for it to verify whether the two above mentioned requirements, which are imposed by the Act, are satisfied. The Plan for 2018-37 submitted to the PUCSL for approval, had two cases, one based mostly on coal power and another a no-coal based case. The Plan had not accounted for cost of externalities. The PUCSL proposed to the CEB that it should consider a low-coal based case as it would reduce the cost of externalities, but the CEB was not willing to revise their Plan. The dispute dragged for nearly a year and the matter was resolved after the (former) President intervened who changed his earlier stance of “no-coal” to “yes-coal” just to accommodate the request of the CEB possibly for fear of action by the CEB Trade Unions.

 

The CEB’s current Plan for 2020-39 was submitted to the PUCSL, in May 2019, but yet to get approval. The correspondences that were exchanged between the PUCSL and the CEB, on approving the CEB’s Plan, is found in the PUCSL website https://www.pucsl.gov.lk/lcltgep-2020-2039/. The PUCSL has drawn the attention of the CEB, repeatedly, that the submitted Draft Plan does not conform to the Cabinet approved Guidelines with regard to having 50% of generation from renewable sources, and also it does included cost of externalities, which are the requirements of the Act.

The PUCSL sent its observations to the CEB, in October 2019, requesting them to revise it as described above, but the CEB sent a Plan, in March 2020, sans the revisions suggested by the PUCSL. Hence, the PUCSL repeated its request in May 2020, and to date, there is no information as to whether the CEB has responded. In a last weekend weekly paper, the Chairman of CEB was reported as saying that “a number of electricity projects were delayed due to the delay in getting a response from the PUCSL”. Instead of trying to blame the PUCSL for delaying electricity projects, without giving specifics, why doesn’t he pull up his officers for not revising the Plan, as requested by the PUCSL, under the powers vested in it, enabling it to conform with the Act?

Fundamentally, preparing least-cost a long-term generation plan, valid for 20 years, hence based on past prices of power plants and fuel, specifying the type of power plants that need to be installed at different time periods to generate electricity at least cost, is something not sound. This is because no one could say with reasonable accuracy what their prices will be and their availability in the future. What the Plan can forecast is the capacity of power plants to be installed year by year for meeting the future demand for electricity, during the next 20 years. The actual type of plant, and the fuel, should be determined only after calling for bids, keeping the type of plant and fuels open, but specifying the requirements for performance and environmental impacts in detail. Once the bids are evaluated, it will be possible to say which option provides the least cost generation, at the time of installing the plant.

 

PRESIDENT’S TARGET ON RENEWABLE ENERGY SHARE

 

It is noted that the renewable share, in total electricity generation, as given in the draft Plan, is only 36% by 2030. The CEB has a long way to go in reaching the President’s target of 70% for this by 2030. It appears that the PUCSL insisting that the CEB conforms to the requirements of the Act and trying to get the CEB to work towards achieving the President’s target, is the crime it has done to have it closed down. It is the responsibility of persons serving as advisors to the President, and the Prime Minister, to place before them the correct information rather than to mislead them. Otherwise, only the country will stand to lose its reputation when such wrong decisions get circulated, internationally, and the country becoming a laughing stock.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Port City Bill Requires Referendum

Published

on

by Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne,PC

The Colombo Port Economic Commission Bill was presented in Parliament on 08 April 2021, while the country was getting ready to celebrate the traditional New Year. With the intervening weekend and public holidays, citizens had just two working days to retain lawyers, many of whom were on vacation, and file applications challenging the constitutionality of the Bill in the Supreme Court within the one-week period stipulated in the Constitution. One wonders whether the timing was deliberate.

Special economic zones are common. They are created mainly to attract foreign investments. In return, investors are offered various concessions so that their products are competitive in the global market. Several negative effects of such zones have also been highlighted. The sole purpose of this article, however, is a discussion on the constitutionality of the Bill.

The Bill seeks to establish a high-powered Commission entrusted with the administration, regulation and control of all matters connected with businesses and other operations in and from the Colombo Port City. It may lease land situated in the Colombo Port City area and even transfer freehold ownership of condominium parcels. It operates as a Single Window Investment Facilitator for proposed investments into the Port City. It would exercise the powers and functions of any applicable regulatory authority under any written law and obtain the concurrence of the relevant regulatory authority, which shall, as a matter of priority, provide such concurrence to the Commission. The discretion and powers of such other authorities under the various laws shall thus stand removed.

The Commission consists of five members who need not be Sri Lankan citizens, quite unlike the Urban Development Authority, the Board of Management of which must comprise Sri Lankan citizens only. One issue that arises is that the vesting of such powers upon persons with loyalties to other countries, especially superpowers, would undermine the free, sovereign, and independent status of Sri Lanka guaranteed by Article 1 of our Constitution. It would also impinge on the sovereignty of the People of Sri Lanka guaranteed by Article 3 read with Article 4.

The removal of the discretionary powers of the various regulatory authorities is arbitrary and violative of the right to equal protection of the law guaranteed by Article 12 (1).

Under Clause 25, only persons authorized by the Commission can engage in business in the Port City. Clause 27 requires that all investments be in foreign currency only. What is worse is that even foreign currency deposited in an account in a Sri Lankan bank cannot be used for investment. Thus, Sri Lankans cannot invest in the Port City using Sri Lankan rupees; neither can they use foreign currency that they legally have in Sri Lanka. The above provisions are clearly arbitrary and discriminatory of Sri Lankans and violate equality and non-discrimination guaranteed by Article 12. They also violate the fundamental right to engage in business guaranteed by Article 14 (1) (g).

Under clause 35, any person, whether a resident or a non-resident, may be employed within the Port City and such employee shall be remunerated in a designated foreign currency, other than in Sri Lanka rupees. Such employment income shall be exempt from income tax. Clause 36 provides that Sri Lankan rupees accepted within the Port City can be converted to foreign currency. Under clause 40, Sri Lankans may pay for goods, services, and facilities in Sri Lankan rupees but would be required to pay a levy for goods taken out of the Port City, as if s/he were returning from another country! The mere repetition of phrases such as ‘in the interests of the national economy’ throughout the Bill like a ‘mantra’ does not bring such restrictions within permissible restrictions set out in Article 15.

Clause 62 requires that all disputes involving the Commission be resolved through arbitration. The jurisdiction of Sri Lankan courts is thus ousted.

In any legal proceedings instituted on civil and commercial matters, where the cause of action has arisen within the Port City or in relation to any business carried on in or from the Port City, Clause 63 requires Sri Lankan courts to give such cases priority and hear them speedily on a day-to-day basis to ensure their expeditious disposal.

The inability of an Attorney-at-Law to appear before the court even for personal reasons, such as sickness, shall not be a ground for postponement. These provisions are arbitrary and violate Article 12.

Clause 73 provides that several Sri Lankan laws listed in Schedule III would have no application within the Port City. Such laws include the Urban Development Authority Act, Municipal Councils Ordinance, and the Town and Country Planning Ordinance. Under Clauses 52 and 53, exemptions may be granted by the Commission from several laws of Sri Lanka, including the Inland Revenue Act, Betting and Gaming Levy Act, Foreign Exchange Act, and the Customs Ordinance.

The Commission being empowered to grant exemptions from Sri Lankan laws undermines the legislative power of the People and of Parliament and violates Articles 3 and Article 4 (c) of the Constitution.

Several matters dealt with by the Bill come under the Provincial Councils List. They include local government, physical planning, and betting and gaming. Article 154G (3) requires that such a Bill be referred to Provincial Councils for their views. As Provincial Councils are not currently constituted, passage by a two-thirds majority will be necessary in the absence of the consent of the Provincial Councils.

The exclusion of the Municipal Councils Ordinance from the Port City area is not possible under the Constitution. When the Greater Colombo Economic Commission was sought to be established in 1978 under the 1972 Constitution, a similar exclusion was held by the Constitutional Court not to be arbitrary. Since then, under the Thirteenth Amendment under the 1978 Constitution, local government has been given constitutional recognition and included under the Provincial Council List. Under the present constitutional provisions, therefore, the Port City cannot be excluded from laws on local government.

The writer submits that in the above circumstances, the Colombo Port Economic Commission Bill requires to be passed by a two-thirds majority in Parliament and approved by the People at a Referendum. Quite apart from the constitutional issues that arise, such an important piece of proposed legislation needs to be widely discussed. It is best that the Bill is referred to a Parliamentary Committee before which the public, as well as citizens’ organizations and experts in the related fields, could make their submissions.

Continue Reading

Features

Investigative Journalism?

Published

on

I usually end up totally exhausted when I finish reading the local newspapers from the Pearl. There are so many burning questions and so much is written about them but there are no conclusions and definitely no answers. For example, we seem to have three burning issues right now and this is not in order of importance.

We have a lengthy report that has been published on the Easter Sunday carnage. Everybody knows what I am talking about. However, no one, be it an editor, a paid journalist or a single one of the many amateurs who write to the papers, has reached a conclusion or even expressed an opinion as to who was responsible. At least not a believable one! Surely there are energetic and committed young people in the field of journalism today who, if asked, or directed properly will go out and find a source that would give them at least a credible hypothesis? Or do conclusions exist and has no one the courage to publish them?

At least interview the authors or should I use the word perpetrators of that report. If they refuse to be interviewed ask them why and publish an item every day asking them why! Once you get a hold of them, cross-examine them, trap them into admissions and have no mercy. It is usually geriatrics who write these reports in the Pearl and surely a bright young journalist can catch them out with a smart question or two, or at least show us that they tried? The future of the country depends on it!

We have allegations of contaminated coconut oil been imported. These are very serious allegations and could lead to much harm to the general populace. Do you really believe that no one can find out who the importers are and what brands they sell their products under? In this the Pearl, where everyone has a price, you mean to say that if a keen young journalist was given the correct ammunition (and I don’t mean 45 calibres) and sent out on a specific message, he or she couldn’t get the information required?

We are told that a massive amount of money has been printed over the last few months. There is only speculation as to the sums involved and even more speculation as to what this means to the people of the Pearl. Surely, there are records, probably guarded by extremely lowly paid government servants. I am not condoning bribery but there is nothing left to condone, is there? There are peons in government ministries who will gladly slip you the details if you are committed enough and if you are sent there to get it by a boss who will stand by you and refuse to disclose his sources.

I put it to you, dear readers, that we do not have enough professional, committed and adequately funded news organisations in the country. We can straightaway discount the government-owned joints. We can also largely discount those being run by magnates for personal gain and on personal agendas. As far as the Internet goes, we can forget about those that specialise in speculative and sensationalist untruths, what are we left with O denizens of the Pearl? Are there enough sources of news that you would consider willing to investigate a matter and risk of life and limb and expose the culprits for the greater good of society? Can they be counted even on the fingers of one hand?

In this era when we have useless political leaders, when law and order are non-existent when the police force is a joke, it is time the fourth estate stepped up to the mark! I am sure we have the personnel; it is the commitment from the top and by this, I mean funding and the willingness to risk life and limb, that we lack. Governments over the last few decades have done their best to intimidate the press and systematically destroy any news outlet that tried to buck the usual sycophantic behaviour that is expected from them by those holding absolute power.

Do you think Richard Nixon would ever have been impeached if not for the Watergate reporting? Donald Trump partially owes his defeat to the unrelenting campaign carried out against him by the “fake news” outlets that he tried to denigrate. Trump took on too much. The fourth estate of America is too strong and too powerful to destroy in a head-to-head battle and even the most powerful man in the world, lost. Let’s not go into the merits and demerits of the victor as this is open to debate.

Now, do we have anything like that in the Pearl? Surely, with 20 million-plus “literate” people, we should? We should have over 70 years of independence built up the Fourth Estate to be proud of. One that would, if it stood strong and didn’t waver and collapse under pressure from the rulers, have ensured a better situation for our land. Here is Aotearoa with just five million people, we have journalists who keep holding the government to account. They are well-funded by newspapers and TV networks with audiences that are only a fraction of what is available in the Pearl. Some of the matters they highlight often bring a smirk of derision to my face for such matters wouldn’t even warrant one single line of newsprint, should they happen in the Pearl.

Talking of intimidation from the rulers, most of us are familiar with the nationalisation of the press, the murder and torture of journalists, the burning of presses to insidious laws been passed to curtail the activities of Journalism. These things have happened in other countries, too, but the people and press have been stronger, and they have prevailed. We are at a watershed, an absolutely crucial time. It is now that our last few credible news sources should lift their game. Give us carefully researched and accurate reports with specific conclusions, not generalisations. Refuse to disclose your sources as is your right, especially now that the myopic eye of the UNHCR is turned in our direction.

All other ways and means of saving our beloved motherland, be it government, religion, sources of law and order and even civil society leadership seems to have lapsed into the realm of theory and rhetoric. Our last chance lies with the Fourth Esate and all it stands for. I call for, nay BEG for, a favourable reaction from those decision-makers in that field, who have enough credibility left in society, DON’T LET US DOWN NOW!

 

 

Continue Reading

Features

The world sees ugly side of our beauty pageants

Published

on

Yes, it’s still the talk-of-the-town…not only here, but the world over – the fracas that took place at a recently held beauty pageant, in Colombo.

It’s not surprising that the local beauty scene has hit a new low because, in the past, there have been many unpleasant happenings taking place at these so-called beauty pageants.

On several occasions I have, in my articles, mentioned that the state, or some responsible authority, should step in and monitor these events – lay down rules and guidelines, and make sure that everything is above board.

My suggestions, obviously, have fallen on deaf ears, and this is the end result – our beauty pageants have become the laughing stock the world over; talk show hosts are creating scenes, connected with the recent incidents, to amuse their audience.

Australians had the opportunity of enjoying this scenario, so did folks in Canada – via talk show hosts, discussing our issue, and bringing a lot of fun, and laughter, into their discussions!

Many believe that some of these pageants are put together, by individuals…solely to project their image, or to make money, or to have fun with the participants.

And, there are also pageants, I’m told, where the winner is picked in advance…for various reasons, and the finals are just a camouflage. Yes, and rigging, too, takes place.

I was witnessed to one such incident where I was invited to be a judge for the Talent section of a beauty contest.

There were three judges, including me, and while we were engrossed in what we were assigned to do, I suddenly realised that one of the contestants was known to me…as a good dancer.

But, here’s the catch! Her number didn’t tally with the name on the scoresheet, given to the judges.

When I brought this to the notice of the organiser, her sheepish reply was that these contestants would have switched numbers in the dressing room.

Come on, they are no babes!

On another occasion, an organiser collected money from the mother of a contestant, promising to send her daughter for the finals, in the Philippines.

It never happened and she had lots of excuses not to return the money, until a police entry was made.

Still another episode occurred, at one of these so-called pageants, where the organiser promised to make a certain contestant the winner…for obvious reasons.

The judges smelt something fishy and made certain that their scoresheets were not tampered with, and their choice was crowned the winner.

The contestant, who was promised the crown, went onto a frenzy, with the organiser being manhandled.

I’m also told there are organisers who promise contestants the crown if they could part with a very high fee (Rs.500,000 and above!), and also pay for their air ticket.

Some even ask would-be contestants to check out sponsors, on behalf of the organisers. One wonders what that would entail!

Right now, in spite of the pandemic, that is crippling the whole world, we are going ahead with beauty pageants…for whose benefit!

Are the organisers adhering to the Covid-19 health guidelines? No way. Every rule is disregarded.

The recently-held contest saw the contestants, on the move, for workshops, etc., with no face masks, and no social distancing.

They were even seen in an open double-decker bus, checking out the city of Colombo…with NO FACE MASKS.

Perhaps, the instructions given by Police Spokesman DIG Ajith Rohana, and Army Commander, General Shavendra Silva, mean nothing to the organisers of these beauty pageants…in this pandemic setting.

My sincere advice to those who are keen to participate in such events is to check, and double check. Or else, you will end up being deceived…wasting your money, time, and energy.

For the record, when it comes to international beauty pageants for women, Miss World, Miss Universe, Miss Earth and Miss International are the four titles which reign supreme.

In pageantry, these competitions are referred to as the ‘Big Four.’

Continue Reading

Trending