By Joel R. San Juan - March 5, 2017
THE National Association of
Electricity Consumers for Reforms (Nasecore) has joined the mounting calls for
the Supreme Court to junk the petition seeking to stop the government from
implementing retail competition and open access (RCOA) in the power industry.
In its motion for intervention filed
last week before the Court, Nasecore Executive Director Rafael Antonio Acebedo
asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition for lack of merit, saying “any
decision or resolution to the contrary will definitely prove harmful to the
welfare and interest of the electricity consuming public.”
Nasecore said it filed the motion in
an effort to reverse the Court’s ruling against RCOA, a policy meant to give
consumers the choice to choose their own electricity supplier.
It argued that without RCOA “certain
industry players will be able to monopolize and abuse the electricity market.”
The SC earlier issued a temporary
restraining order (TRO) that stopped the implementation of RCOA, which was
supposed to take effect on February 26, based on a petition filed by the Philippine
Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Ateneo de Manila University, San Beda College
(Alabang) and mall owner Riverbanks Development Corp.
“One of the pillars of the
restructuring of the energy industry, as envisioned by the Epira [the Electric
Power Industry Reform Act of 2001], is the establishment of retail competition
and open access. The framers of the Epira believed that the migration of
electricity consumers to the competitive retail electricity market would lead
to market competition thereby leading to lower and reasonable electricity
prices,” Nasecore said in its comment in intervention.
“Nasecore is intervening in the
present case based on the ground that the issues raised herein are matters of
transcendental importance, public service, policy and interest, and that its
electricity consumers-members will be directly, actually and greatly affected
by the annulment of the Department of Energy [DOE] and Energy Regulatory
Commission’s [ERC] assailed issuances in this petition,” Acebedo said.
Nasecore said it “vehemently
disagrees” with the petitioners who wished to stop RCOA, which is covered by
DOE Circular DC-2015-06-0010, series of 2015; ERC Resolution 5, Series of 2016;
ERC Resolution 10, Series of 2016; ERC Resolution 11, Series of 2016; and ERC Resolution
28, Series of 2016.
“The assailed issuances are valid
and reasonable regulatory measures geared toward the promotion of the avowed
purposes of the Epira, among others, promote true market competition and
prevent harmful monopoly and market power abuse in the electric power
industry,” Nasecore said.
The group pointed out that it
is holding on to EPIRA’s promise to promote true market competition and prevent
harmful monopoly and market power abuse in the electric power industry.
It hopes that this promise will bring the cost of electricity down not just for
the large electricity consumers but also for the end-users at the household
level.
No comments:
Post a Comment