BU getting some serious licks over at BFP

Thanks for the correction Juris. Did this matter go to appeal?

Even if the legal avenue was exhausted the current system which short changes the people is flawed. The government at least consider a subsidy.

David, the difficulty with a subsidy is that there would have to be some limit on the numberb of intervenors. What criterion/criteria will be used to determine the deserving?

Don’t mind BFP. As my late mother used to say ” they only want noticing!”

@ GP
“What BU getting what licks what?”
…nice language, properly applied… Sweet!

@ David
….those that criticize you are not worthy to tie your shoe laces…
When I become a full grown bush, I want to be just like you….

@David et al…

@David: “Thanks for the correction Juris. Did this matter go to appeal?

It did. And the judgement against the Intervenors stood.

As I understand it (I was not involved with the C&W hearing that this court case concerned) the Intervenors were simply seeking compensation for out-of-pocket expenses.

For the record… I, personally, incurred several hundred dollars of out-of-pocket expenses during the last hearing.

This does *not* include the time expended (pro bono) by ROK, Douglas Skeete and myself. I don’t even want to think about what that was worth…

But Juris raises above an important point — if Intervenors were to be paid, who would pay them? It can’t be the Company directly, or else there would be the risk of bias (or at least, the perception of same).

And, separately, what would be the criteria for compensation? There are many who claim to be Consumer Advocates who don’t actually have a clue what is going on… (Not mentioning any names…)

One thing I would like to say here, however…

In my considered opinion, BL&P is quite a different company when compared to some others who have gone before the FTC.

Just because there are lots of zeros involved does *not* mean the consumer is necessarily being screwed over.

Diligence must still be exercised, but all groups should not be painted with the same brush.

(For the record — I am not currently, nor have I ever been, retained by BL&P in any form nor for any function. I *did* work with TeleBarbados for a while, but please trust me when I tell you that that experience did not not endeared me to their organization.)

@BU Family… Please forgive me for being pedantic. I know this is frustrating for many of you… But sometimes a single word can be critically important…

@Christopher Halsall: “…please trust me when I tell you that that experience did not not endeared me to their organization.

This should have read: “…please trust me when I tell you that that experience did not endeared me to their organization.

Or, in the Geek: “s/did not not/did not/

@David you are doing a great job and your output has always been in my view very balanced.
@Chris I read you back and forth woth Keltruth and BFP today. They both come off as very petty. I do appreciate your input on all matters your thoughts are always well presented.

@KotLK: “I read you back and forth woth Keltruth and BFP today.

Please forgive me for being pedantic KotLK, but…

I (and everyone else should) read your above to mean that *you* read my interactions with Keltruth and BFP from quite some time ago, today.

Or, put another way: Wow! Are you ever slow!

Because, to the best of my knowledge, I have not interacted with either Keltruth or BFP for months…

Please let me know if I’m wrong in my above interpretation….

@General Lee

We can go further and quote Malcom Gibbs-Taitt is has expressed concern that the Chairman of the FTC is also Chairman of of the Stock Exchange.

Interveners.what?
Apologies to Bush Tea.

The FTC is paid by us to arbitrate.

A fair settlement between monopolistic demands and the people’s ability to pay

They should have at their disposal the finest forensic accountants along with consumer advocates presenting the people’s case.

This monopoly vs amateur intervenor is so loaded against fairness it is not true.

Have the interveners ever won a case against the monopolies,?

If so, I’ll shut up.

If not. the whole FTC charade should be scrapped.

CH,
Am I to conclude that the FTC can ignore a policy directive given by the GOB for nearly two years and the GOB says and does nothing and the media is silent on the issue?
What could we the poor masses, have done to deserve such?

Please say it ain’t so.

@Chris

Who is the person who has the accountability to make this happen?

@chris yes it is true I just now read it. BFP tends to be very inflammatory and I read very select articles and do so more to read posters (like you) perspectives than the editorial content. After BFP flamed BU for allowing BWWR (or whatever it is) to put forth another perspective, I lost all respect for them. Thing about BU is they allow everyone to put forth their views you simply don’t have to read everthing. For instance although generally being a DLP supporter I do not read Hartley Henry’s propoganda articles, I may however read the comments similarly Dark Knight, Royal Rumble/Kofi and others for the same reasons.

@Straight talk… I mostly agree with your above. However…

@ST: “Have the interveners ever won a case against the monopolies,?

In fact, yes.

During the C&W Metered Rate Hearing, the Intervenors successfully argued that this should not be allowed.

And during the BL&P Depreciation Hearing, the BANGO Team successfully argued that the Company should be required to file annual reports to the Commission.

Just because the Intervenors are handicapped because of lack of resources does *not* mean they are impotent.

And please note that BANGO requested assistance from the public for the BL&P hearing.

Not a single person stepped forward — not a lawyer to give guidance. Not a donor to pay for Internet access. Hell, we didn’t even have anyone offer to volunteer to be a camera operator despite two requests.

Actually, that’s not entirely true that no one offered to assist. Creative Junction did provide BANGO with a high-end digital video camera, but because we didn’t have anyone to operate it, we were only able to record the last day of the hearing.

IMHO, Bajans love to complain. But when it comes time to actually expend time, effort or money they simply assume that it’s someone else’s responsibility.

Contrary to what many people think, the Intervenors are not amateurs. Intervenors represent a diversity of talent and information not easily found in other matters.

The process of having intervenors was well thought out by Parliament. The bill itself recognises the importance of the intervenors in the process of rate setting; especially to assist the FTC and this has to do with the Intervenors’ ability to draw out critical information from the company, which consumers have the right to ask for and which the company has to respect with an answer.

Intervenors assist the FTC in difficult times, in dealing with the monopoly by our ability to take matters to the public as consumers and the influence negative press would have on their goodwill and good public image, which it spends millions of dollars a year polishing and doing damage control.

Most important is that Intervenors are able to bring social considerations to the table; from a true consumers’ perspective. So we do a lot for the process; to see that it is fair and transparent; that is why intervenors are granted access to confidentiality hearings; that is how we were able to take the peoples business not just to the High Court, but to the Court of Appeal with professionalism.

What we don’t have are experts in the field because none of us work in the field professionally. What makes it hard on us is that where professionals with certain skills can spot and encapsulate, we take the long road; but we get there by research and talking, discussing and sharing with one another.

People talk about Wendell, but in reading back some of Wendell, Miles Rothwell, Frank Alleyne, etc. They needed help too… but even with what skills and adequacy they had, they were able to put up some good fights.

To my mind, we as Intervenors are doing a bit better than they did. We also have to be thankful for the modernisation of the legislation. A fight to have regulatory accounts published annually which was started by Wendell saw success in the last hearing with the BL&P; as put forward for the first time by the Intervenors.

It means that anytime C&W comes before the FTC again, this rule will have to extend to them as well. So this is significant.

I have personally seen the diversity of Intervenors at work, for example, in cross examination during the C&W rate hearing, Intervenors were the last to cross examine witnesses.

The FTC employed an attorney to cross examine the witnesses and each Commissioner had the opportunity to cross examine before us.

After all the lawyers, public counsel and the members of the Panel, each intervenor that cross examined witnesses was able to extract something from witnesses which all these professionals could not extract.

There were 7 or 8 Intervenors who cross examined consistently and caught witnesses on points that helped cement the case for a freeze in rates and deny the application of metered phones. It was the intervenors who led this fight and provided the rationale for winning the argument against metered phones.

Public Counsel for a long time, was privy to our reasoning and since he went first he covered a lot of the ground, but even he was not enough.

He required our backing and perspective to win his arguments, as a matter of fact he argued as an Intervenor for the Council for the Disabled (BCD) and at one point for BARCRO.

What Public Counsel argued for BCD is what BANGO and BCD got together and decided; ask the President of the time; ask former Public Counsel too.

At this present time, there is another battle to fight, and that is against the Abuse of the Price Cap mechanism (PCM). At the end of each period, there is supposed to be a review and the FTC has not stuck to the law as the Review should have been a hearing as prescribed by the legislation. We, as consumers, must take the FTC to court over this matter, otherwise we letting C&W get away with murder; emptying our pockets.

In Canada, there was established an independent body of men, who were referred to as the “Men in Black”. They were professional Intervenors and our legislation was fashioned after theirs. The idea of the Intervenor stems from this experience becsue it would seem that the only reason for allowing the department to fold, was the fact the these guys were so successful.

When the men in black went after utilities and other monopolies and businesses, it was a serious battle. The Men in Black were not to be played with and had a serious reputation as defenders of the consumer.

@David

I just realise that I did not respond to your last post on this thread. Have to apologise for that and since it is a question that has intrigue I will respond, just give me a bit of time.

As you know, the process for hearing the application by the BL&P is underway. We had a Procedural Conference so far, which basically dealt with timelines and procedures for engaging the Panel, the Applicant and fellow intervenors.

An issues Conference is scheduled for 3rd September 2009 and there is also a Confidentiality Hearing where the BL&P is seeking confidentiality for the negotiations for natural gas from T&T. I am here seeking a quick answer for this matter from the BU family who may have an idea and who were following certain news.

Does Barbados have an exclusive agreement with Trinidad for the supply of petroleum products?

Are there any competitors for the supply of petroleum products (specifically natural gas) to Barbados and who would they be?

What prevented Barbados from entering the “Petro Caribe” agreement?

Please let me apologise for springing this on you but our deadline to object to confidentiality is tomorrow and we are just seeking either guidance or information because of the constraint of time.

Answers to the above are critical to our objection to confidentiality and would be grateful for some assistance.