Dear Editor,
I was pleased that the GPL responded with three phone calls and the actual reading of my meter on Monday, the very day that my letter titled, ‘Lack of access is hogwash’ (SN, November 16) appeared. Then came the response ‘GPL is committed to monthly meter readings despite the challenges’ (SN, November 20). This sounds good on the surface but left more than disappointment. It left troubling concerns, and some anger.
GPL’s responding letter on Thursday states, “GPL’s Public Relations Office has a procedure….for related articles that may require a response…” There were three letters in SN titled ‘Estimated bills from utilities cause severe financial distress to struggling citizens’ (June 29); ‘Outrage at pay package’ (August 18); and ‘Food and Drug Department should have meeting with affected business people’ (October 31). Two of the three letters flayed the GPL, at length, for its unacceptable practice of estimated bills. Yet, there was no GPL response at any time. Obviously, the daily reviewing scrutinizers lack the requisite concentration, competence and care, and were derelict in their duty.
Additionally, the letter also stated that “Mr Lall’s … grievance was not sent to me via email until November 16, 2015…” A prior email communication dated May 30, 2015 sent to the PR Department and clearly marked “For the Attention of PRO Mrs. Sears-Murray” was shared with GPL’s PRO on Monday, November 16th, but again GPL’s internal mechanisms failed and that May 30th message either did not reach the PRO or no one thought it worthwhile to address the matter. This is another instance of negligence and failure, in what might be standard practice. For the PRO to now claim that communication started on Monday, November 16, 2015 is a shade disingenuous, if not outright deceptive. It could be argued that, despite GPL being a public utility, it is entitled to its own propaganda; it is, however, incontestable that it is not entitled to its own facts, or distortion of applicable facts. The attack on my truthfulness is disturbing, as the messenger is now discredited, and very subtly so.
Further, GPL’s letter of Thursday instant said that “we can unequivocally confirm that Mr Lall’s statement with respect to the difference between estimated and actual consumption is grossly inaccurate.” My last bill for Oct 2015 has an estimated reading of 43,383 units, while GPL’s online facility has a “Current Reading” of 45,621 kwh/units. In my book that is a major discrepancy of some 2000 units @ $55 per unit, which is more than my own last reading of the meter. I am surprised that the GPL can say I am “grossly inaccurate” when the GPL itself could not tell me on what basis that was arrived at, since the actual reading was still either unknown or unavailable. This has to be a travesty of accuracy, and I sense some posturing, which further agitates.
Separately, an overture has been made by the GPL to keep this issue indoors and out of the public domain. I am all for this, but not when the GPL has gone out of its way by glossing over the issue with corporate speak; misrepresenting the facts on the ground, and as they stand irrefutably; and subjecting me to serious credibility issues. All of this is problematic for me and none more so than the last issue.
Editor, the final points I wish to make are these: This issue is far larger than me. This is about the regular citizen who is unable (or unwilling) to write a letter which may not generate ministerial interest, and who is faced with the ominous prospect ‒ perhaps actuality ‒ of a huge unexpected bill and threatened disconnection. I can deal with this issue on several fronts. The ordinary longsuffering, intimidated citizen cannot do so. And this is what has to be remedied by the GPL in an accurate, timely, and forthright manner.
The overseeing minister has been made aware of my anger and dissatisfaction. He and his people are thanked for their interest and assistance. Ms Aneka Edwards, one of his assistants, has been the epitome of courtesy and sterling professionalism. The GPL could learn from her.
Usually, I move on after my second comment. I plan to stay with this, if only to hold the GPL accountable, and keep matters in the public gaze.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
