Dear Editor,
Operating utility companies like GEBE is a relatively difficult management challenge. With most companies (NV’s) the challenge is to make a profit. In the case of a state-owned enterprise like GEBE, the focus is less on making a profit but more on other things. Like all companies it is the shareholder who ultimately determines the direction of the company, and in the case of GEBE the question is what guidance was given to supervisory boards and management. GEBE has a wide range of tasks. They have to produce power and water and also have to manage the distribution.
In the case of water, they have private sector producers who have deep experience in the business of desalination production so their risk is reduced.
In the case of power production they are all on their own and there is only one way of producing it; by running large engines which have a huge capital cost and are not quickly replaceable. The greatest company mission is to keep meeting demand.
My guess is that the focus of the shareholder was mostly on job creation, employee contentment and there was little focus by the shareholder on the risk of not meeting demand in spite of the fact that demand increase was likely to grow rapidly as construction was stimulated in an effort to keep growth in the economy. It’s just a guess though!
The production of power requires long forward planning and financing. There is only one method of producing and to upgrade this method requires a long lead time.
With the lack of transparency that exists in state-owned companies in our system we will never know whether the need for the forward planning was done by the operators of GEBE, nor how it was responded to by the shareholder.
It would give the population confidence in our future if non-political entities with experience in the utility sector and particularly power production could investigate and provide insight into the circumstances that led the country down the path that led to the load shedding and disruption that is being experienced.
Robbie Ferron
