Public Utility Law Reform in Barbados: Learning from the American Experience
Year: 1984
Type: preprint
Abstract: Public utility regulation commenced in Barbados on January 1, 1955 under the Public Utilities Act, which created the Public Utilities Board as a body corporate with perpetual succession and assigned a number of statutory powers to the Board. The Act is basically sound and works well. However, the Act does not specifically refer to a number of areas that the author suggests are in need of reform. In this article, the author has articulated a number of reforms that he suggests would improve public utility regulation in Barbados.The suggested reforms relate to legislative enactment of amendments that: [i] create specific duties for the attorney to the Board to perform; [ii] require appeals of Board decisions to be brought against the Board; [iii] create Public Counsel obligated to defend the interests of the Board; [iv] add express provisions to be followed by the Board when conducting the review of its own decisions; [v] create express rehearing provisions to be followed by the Board; [vi] create express provisions applicable to dealing with attempts to introduce new evidence on appeal; and [vii] create express provisions governing retroactive ratemaking. The author suggests that the Barbados Legislature can conduct an analysis and evaluation of American public utility provisions and practice and then adopt those specifics that are appropriate to the Barbados context. The American experience is instructive for the following reasons. Fourteen states have statutes which require an attorney to represent the Board or Commission on appeal. Almost all other states have Board or commission Counsel with somewhat less specific duties. Many state statutes provide that counsel shall represent the Commission “in all actions in which it is, a party,” or similar language. Additionally, in the U.S., appeals are brought against the Board, unlike the Barbados provisions. Finally, in a majority of states, the Attorney General either represents the Commission, appoints the public utility’s Counsel and directs the activities of Counsel, or assigns an Assistant Attorney General to represent the Commission.The author also suggests that it is more elegant and efficient to ensure that in Barbados counsel to the Board shall remain entirely separate from and unconnected with the Attorney General or Solicitor-General. This would prevent a conflict of interest from arising because in Barbados, the government is probably the largest single consumer of the services of both utilities that operate on the Island and the Attorney General and Solicitor-General should be free to represent the Barbados Government (as a consumer) if the Barbados Government (as a complainant) should choose to oppose the utility’s application for a rate increase.
Source: SSRN Electronic Journal
Author: Stephen J. Leacock
Institution: Barry University
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2522275720