Connect with us

Business

‘PUCSL electricity tariff revision is discriminatory’

Published

on

Electricity tariff design must meet two main objectives: firstly, raising the money needed to pay for the costs of provision, and secondly, sending the right economic signals to each customer to favour the optimal socio-economic use of electricity.

To achieve the above objectives the principles that must be followed when designing tariffs are;

Economic sustainability or revenue sufficiency,

Equity or non-discrimination among users,

Economic efficiency in resource allocation, and

Transparency, simplicity, and stability of the methodology.

A well-defined and appropriate tariff structure must balance the financial sustainability of the sector on the one hand and the well-being of various segments of society on the other. The CEB’s tariff revisions seem to be mainly focused on the aspect of revenue sufficiency, ignoring the other aspects. As electricity is a commodity, there should be no difference in the prices charged to different users, except when reflecting any differences in the cost of providing services to different classes of users.

A differential tariff implies that some categories are subsidised leading to the question of who pays these subsidies. The current structure is such that households consuming an excess of 60 Kwh, and general purpose bulk supply users subsidise the industrial, hotel and charitable sectors.

Households that consume over 90 Kwh and general purpose bulk customers are charged a tariff that is double that of industries and hotels. With regards to hotels, in effect, domestic consumers subsidise foreign tourists. However, the differential tariff between general bulk supply and industrial/hotel users is meaningless. For example, a hall that hosts weddings and celebrations would be treated as a general bulk customer and be charged double the tariff that a hotel would be charged, even though both host similar events. A restaurant in a shopping mall would be charged as a general customer, but the same restaurant located within a hotel would enjoy a tariff half of that which a hotel incurs. While this differential existed under the previous tariff, it is made worse under the new structure; hotels faced a 10% increase in tariff while general users faced a 20% increase.

If the idea behind a lower tariff for hotels is to make the sector more competitive, then the solution is to address the causes of uncompetitiveness directly. One area is construction costs which raises the level of investment and the cost of maintenance. Protectionism for the domestic construction materials industry raises the costs of steel bars and rods, sanitary ware, aluminium extrusions, granite, electrical fittings, and carpets resulting in high overall construction cost. The effective protection granted on these items can exceed 200%; the savings in finance cost from a lower capital outlay would probably exceed the savings from a lower electricity tariff.

Economic value creation can take place in many different ways in an economy and the service sector is no less important than other sectors. The cross subsidisation between customers violates the equity or non-discrimination principle of a good tariff and discourages use by the overcharged and promotes overconsumption by the subsidised.

For example, the higher domestic tariff may serve as a disincentive for remote work. Remote or flexible work arrangements can reduce transport costs, congestion, energy use and for some, enable a better work/life balance. The government should be facilitating flexible work but the higher rates applicable to some domestic consumers may be a disincentive.

Economic activity is increasingly complex and a value chain can involve many different sectors. For example, the tea industry involves agriculture, processing in factories, transport, warehousing, blending, financing, marketing and exports. Moreover, products are now more knowledge intensive, so a greater part of the value addition arises in non-production-oriented components of the value chain. With differential tariffs, parts of the same value chain may pay different prices for use of the same commodity.

Further, a lower tariff to “industry” penalises new economy enterprises while promoting highly energy intensive users. This distorts resource allocation by encouraging excessive energy consumption, artificially promoting capital-intensive industries where the country may not have a clear comparative advantage. A subsidised tariff also blunts the incentive to economise.

The cost of supplying electricity fluctuates throughout the day, depending on the power generation mix, cost of fuels used, transmission costs and energy losses but as electricity storage is not economically viable, it has to be consumed whenever it is produced. Households with rooftop solar thus enjoy a subsidy. Domestic solar generation takes place in day time where the cost of generation is low but the import of electricity to the house takes place at night when the cost of generation is high. Offsetting units generated against units imported results in a subsidy because of the difference in costs between the two. Time of use metres should be mandated for all domestic users on net metering with the import/export being accounted for on the respective time of use tariff. Indeed all users who consume above 60 Kwh should move to the time of use tariff.

Should the government decide to subsidise the capital or operating costs to serve certain customer classes, it should do so directly from the budget and while a lifeline tariff for the poor is justified the high domestic users pay a tariff 7.4x that of the lowest. Not all households are the same size and an extended family living in a single house may face a much higher tariff although their income level may not differ greatly from the average.

The PUCSL should review tariffs to prevent the distortions highlighted above. Instead of cross-subsidies, the regulator should be working to reduce overall cost of the provision of electricity through better procurement and greater efficiency.

Treating all costs as a pass-through in computing the tariff is a mistake. The PUCSL needs to set efficiency targets in order to set fair and reasonable tariffs. The CEB should be incentivised to control its costs by specifying and enforcing performance requirements. Benchmarking CEB performance against regional and international peers to assess relative efficiency is necessary, as is consulting stakeholders on achievable efficiency targets.

Advocata is an independent policy think tank based in Colombo, Sri Lanka. We conduct research, provide commentary and hold events to promote sound policy ideas compatible with a free society in Sri Lanka. Visit advocata.org for more information.

Advocata spokespersons are available for live and pre-recorded broadcast interviews via 0774858401

CONTACT:

Subashini Kaneshwaren,

Senior Communications Executive, Advocata Institute

Email: subashini@advocata.org



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Business

Central Bank says it merely executed government instructions

Published

on

CBSL Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe takes questions from the audience at the public seminar held at the Central Bank yesterday.

USD 2.5 million sovereign debt payment:

The Central Bank merely carried out the controversial USD 2.5 million sovereign debt payment in accordance with instructions issued by the government, Central Bank Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe said yesterday, emphasising that the institution acted solely in its capacity as banker to the state.

Addressing a question at a public seminar, Dr. Weerasinghe explained that the Central Bank’s responsibility in such transactions is operational rather than supervisory. According to him, once the Ministry of Finance or the Treasury issues a payment order, the Central Bank processes the transfer exactly as instructed, without involvement in determining the beneficiary or the broader decision-making process behind the payment.

The Governor’s remarks came in response to a query regarding the widely discussed USD 2.5 million sovereign debt repayment reportedly sent to a party in Australia and later alleged to have been siphoned off by a cyber criminal.

“The Central Bank is the banker to the government just as it is to commercial banks,” he explained. “When we receive a payment instruction from the Ministry of Finance or the Treasury, we execute that payment in line with the instructions given to us.”

He noted that the Central Bank credits the account specified by its client, in this case, the government — and subsequently informs the relevant authorities once the transaction has been completed. If a payment cannot be processed or is rejected by the banking system, the Bank notifies the client accordingly. And when a payment is successful, the client would receive a notification, he said.

However, Dr. Weerasinghe indicated that the Central Bank would not necessarily be aware if recipient details had been altered elsewhere in the chain of communication prior to the transaction reaching the Bank for execution.

The Governor also highlighted the institutional changes that took effect from January 1, 2026. He explained that when the Public Debt Department functioned under the Central Bank, the institution had a more direct role in sovereign debt management and decision-making. With the External Debt Department now operating under the Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank’s role has become largely facilitative.

Under the current arrangement, he said, the Bank simply processes payments on behalf of the government. If the Treasury provides funds in Sri Lankan rupees, the Central Bank converts them into US dollars before remitting the payment. Alternatively, the payment may be made from government accounts maintained at the Central Bank or from the country’s foreign reserves.

To simplify the explanation, Dr. Weerasinghe compared the process to an ordinary customer instructing a commercial bank to transfer money to a designated recipient. In such instances, the bank processes the transaction based on the customer’s instructions rather than independently verifying the account details of the recipient.

Through his remarks, the Governor strongly conveyed that the Central Bank had no involvement in the policy or decision-making aspects of the disputed payment and acted purely as the executing financial institution on behalf of the government.

By Sanath Nanayakkare

Continue Reading

Business

Lime trees to crack HEC conundrum

Published

on

A pioneering community-based conservation initiative aimed at reducing the devastating impact of Human-Elephant Conflict (HEC) while strengthening rural livelihoods was launched on Sunday in the Anuradhapura District under the theme “Lime Trees for Peace Between Elephants and People.”

The project, spearheaded by the Elephant Human Coexistence Foundation, was officially launched in Maningamuwa Village in the Central Nuwaragam Palatha Divisional Secretariat area, marking what conservationists describe as a practical and environmentally sustainable approach to one of Sri Lanka’s gravest socio-economic and ecological crises.

As part of the inaugural phase, 1,200 lime plants were distributed among four farming families to establish bio fences around agricultural lands.

The initiative seeks to use citrus-based living barriers as a natural deterrent to elephants, reducing crop raids without harming wildlife.

Co-Founder and Director of the Foundation, Panchali Panapitiya, said the project was designed not only to protect crops, but also to transform vulnerable farming communities into active custodians of coexistence.

“Human-Elephant Conflict cannot be solved through fear, violence, or isolation,” Panapitiya told The Island Financial Review. “We believe coexistence becomes sustainable only when communities themselves are empowered as leaders and partners in conservation. This initiative combines environmental protection with livelihood security.”

She said the lime tree fences would create a “living shield” around farms while simultaneously generating long-term economic benefits for rural families.

“Coexistence grows as communities thrive. Peace takes root when livelihoods are strengthened,” she said.

Sri Lanka continues to record alarming levels of Human-Elephant Conflict annually, with both elephant and human fatalities increasing in recent years. Rural farmers in districts such as Anuradhapura, Polonnaruwa, and Moneragala frequently suffer severe crop losses, while conventional mitigation methods — including electric fencing — often remain costly, difficult to maintain, or ecologically disruptive.

Against this backdrop, conservationists say the use of lime-based bio fencing presents a low-cost and climate-friendly alternative.

The Foundation noted that similar citrus-based deterrent systems have already demonstrated success in parts of Africa and Thailand, where elephants naturally avoid strong citrus scents. The Sri Lankan initiative aims to scientifically assess the effectiveness of local lime species as protective barriers for small and medium-scale farms.

Importantly, lime tree bio fences have already been recognised in the official Anuradhapura District Plan for the Mitigation of Human-Elephant Conflict, giving the initiative institutional backing from the District Secretariat, Divisional Secretariats, and the Department of Wildlife Conservation.

Panapitiya stressed that the project also carries broader environmental and social goals beyond conflict mitigation.

“This is about restoring harmony between people, elephants, and landscapes,” she said. “At the same time, these trees contribute to carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, and economic resilience in farming communities.”

A notable component of the programme is its emphasis on women’s empowerment within the agriculture sector, traditionally dominated by men. The Foundation believes conservation-linked agriculture can create pathways towards financial independence for rural women while strengthening household resilience.

The project’s broader objectives include reducing fatalities linked to Human-Elephant Conflict, improving rural economic stability, increasing community participation in conservation efforts, and supporting the long-term preservation of Sri Lanka’s endangered elephant populations.

Environmentalists attending the launch described the initiative as an example of how conservation and rural development can work together rather than in opposition.

Those present at the event included Panapitiya, Co-Founder and Director Manoja Weerakkody, Co-Founder and Director Duminda Dissanayake, officials from the Central Nuwaragam Palatha Divisional Secretariat, and representatives of the Department of Wildlife Conservation.

The Foundation expressed hope that the programme would eventually be expanded throughout the Anuradhapura District and potentially replicated in other Human-Elephant Conflict hotspots across Sri Lanka.

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Business

Strangers at orientation, family by finals- the story of friends at SLIIT

Published

on

“Bro” is a word you hear frequently at SLIIT. Study halls, elevators, canteens and even corridors echo with lively chatter of students either discussing project work, venting frustrations, debating the latest films or catching their breath from laughing. Almost immediately, ethnic backgrounds, religious beliefs, gender, and place of origin don’t matter when you hear “Bro, send me the notes,” or “Bro, let’s go for the match.”

The traditional idea of a family requires some form of biological relationship, but behind the gates at SLIIT, this is not necessarily the case. In a student body of over 25,000, studying more than 100 different programmes, friend groups frequently develop into something deeper: a sense of belonging that feels like family. Every year on International Day of Families (May 15), we are reminded of the importance of family in creating our identities and these close-knit groups at SLIIT are no different.

For many students, the university experience begins with uncertainty. Being surrounded by unexpected faces and new expectations can be intimidating at first. However, it is during these moments that long-term ties begin to form. A simple introduction during orientation, a shared chuckle during lectures, or teamwork in group projects are frequently the beginnings of meaningful friendships.

SLIIT’s vibrant student life is designed to foster these friendships. From faculty-led events and sports activities to student organizations and societies, students are nudged to collaborate despite their differences. Most importantly, these environments are designed to inspire growth and personal reflection even when faced with conflicting ideas. What results is a strong sense of community and students who have the skill to thrive in challenging situations.

These relationships evolve throughout time. Friends who stood in as study partners, motivators, and emotional support systems stay connected even after they graduate. For many alumni, these friendships are among the most treasured aspects of their academic experience. Even after transitioning into professional employment, these ties remain strong, forming networks of support, collaboration, and continued friendship.

According to Harshana, currently in their third year at SLIIT, it is critical to remember that family is not only defined by where we come from, but also by the ties we form. The friendships created at SLIIT teach that sometimes the strongest families are those we create for ourselves.

Continue Reading

Trending