P.U.C. announces interconnection rates
The Public Utilities Commission today announced what it calls “new rates” for the telecommunication industry; but after careful perusal of the document issued at a mid-morning press conference, it appears that the more things change, the more they remain the same. However, those of you carrying around both Intelco and B.T.L. cellular phones will be pleased to hear that you may soon be able to merge your calls. The P.U.C. says it has approved interconnection tariffs for domestic traffic between the two companies during peak periods. They claim both parties have agreed to the rates, which B.T.L. had offered specifically for interconnection between a new entrant’s mobile network and B.T.L.’s fixed and mobile networks. The interconnection rates are roughly six cents per minute for Intelco mobiles to B.T.L. fixed local, sixteen cents for Intelco mobiles to B.T.L. fixed national, thirty cents for Intelco mobile to B.T.L. mobile, and thirty cents per minute for B.T.L. fixed and mobile to INTELCO mobile. The P.U.C. characterized the interconnection difficulties of the past year and a half as quote “an elusive goal” and says it hopes negotiations on the other terms and conditions required for an interconnection agreement can be concluded quickly.
While a resolution to the interconnection issue has been eagerly awaited by consumers, it was not the focus of the press conference, but just one of six decisions announced today. Although it was rumoured that phone rates might be going down, with the exception of setting a ceiling on international calls, most of the rates the P.U.C. approved are the same rates B.T.L. is already charging. Customers can at least be comforted by the fact that they won?t be going up, as most of the proposed increases B.T.L. had announced via the newspapers back in July of 2003 were not approved. However, B.T.L. is going to be allowed to keep its exorbitant twenty dollars line access and maintenance fee for residential users and fifty dollars for business users. The P.U.C. also refrained from setting rates for international and internet services, saying they will allow market forces to determine these, especially in light of technologies like voice over internet protocols. In the spirit of competition, both Intelco, B.T.L. and any other provider who might arrive on the scene will also have to woo their customers without rates being set by the P.U.C., although the P.U.C. says they can intervene under section twenty-six of the telecommunications act if they detect quote “anti-competitive pricing and acts of unfair competition.” However, all service providers must file their service rates with the PUC and give the public notice. But if you are shaking your head at this point and wondering how those less fortunate are coping with the high cost of using the telephone, the P.U.C. did announce special provisions for low income, needy customers with residential and line access charges being dropped to five dollars a month for those who qualify. They estimate some fifty-six thousand customers will benefit from this new arrangement and B.T.L. says it anticipates a further five thousand will enjoy this lower rate as they expand their services to rural areas next year. For his part, P.U.C. Chairman, Gilbert Canton says he does not anticipate any difficulties with the implementation of these new rates, which become effective June first.
Gilbert Canton, Chairman, P.U.C.
“I think there are several benefits. If you look at the category of customers, obviously the low income and needy persons are getting a break right now with the five dollars a month access fee, no security deposit, no installation charges. Definitely they are benefiting, there should be a further roll out in this areas for people that need that kind service. Secondly, there are a lot of areas out there that are not covered right now because the technology solution is not a wire line solution because of the disparity and scarcity of the customers. And that cost of putting in that technology was very high because of the customer premises equipment, the radios, the antennas everything costs so much money; it was like fifteen hundred dollars, so we are saying now that it should be one hundred dollars and the company will be able to recoup that over a longer period of time, through line access and maintenance charge.”
“What we have done in this situation is that we have not done this in isolation. We halve already informed B.T.L. of these rates and stuff and they have agreed. We have no problems with them on this. I don’t think at this point in time, there is no dispute over it, so I do not expect any glitches in terms of the implementation of the rates.”
Patrick Jones
“By your approving of these rates which were basically what or close to what you contended to have been illegal rates. Isn’t this giving B.T.L. some sort of vindication that they were right all along?”
Gilbert Canton
“Not it?s not a vindication of what was right or wrong because that issue is still a legal issue, to be determined, it?s an issue of lawfulness. What we are saying now yes we have conclude that they have been charging, or are charging an economical cost based rate, that is the distinction that we are making there. And if you remember, when they did their first rebalancing they were saying that this was, in their opinion, a cost based rate but then they came back later and said they needed to increase it some more. And it?s just showing that at that point in time those are the rates, and that we have come up with is similar to them as being the cost based rate, the new economic rates that become effective on June first.”
Despite Canton’s assertion that the P.U.C. did not foresee any difficulty with the implementation of interconnectivity, late this evening INTELCO issued a statement advising the public that what was announced at today’s press conference is not a satisfactory arrangement to them because “it does not allow for interconnection of our fixed residential and corporate network to B.T.L.’s mobile and fixed network. Rather, it allows for interconnection to only our mobile network while the incumbent operator is allowed full interconnection from both of their networks to our cell network.” Intelco says that unless this issue is addressed the Government of Belize would be wasting five hundred thousand dollars per month since it is not compelling full interconnection with already installed INTELCO equipment in Belmopan and Belize City government offices.
