The Senate this afternoon ratified the controversial Telecommunications Undertaking (Belize Telecommunications Limited Operations) Vesting Bill, under which a new entity, Belize Telemedia Limited, will take over the business of the Belize Telecommunications Limited.
That, of course, depends on the day the Governor-General, Sir Colville Young, fixes for the bill to become law.
Despite opposition to the bill from Senators representing the private sector, the trade unions and the Opposition (United Democratic Party), all six ruling People’s United Party Senators banded together to support the bill. The ruling party secured a 6-5 majority, as the senator representing the Council of Churches, Moises Chan, was absent and did not vote in today’s proceedings.
Those who objected to the bill argued that it hinged on a secret business transfer agreement, dated September 15, 2006, that they had not seen, and the terms of which are subject to change even after the Senate gives its stamp of approval.
PUP Senator, Anthony Chanona, who supported the bill, said that he has had the privilege of seeing the agreement—marked “confidential”—and even though he proposed that his colleagues should also see the agreement, he went ahead and voted for the passage of the bill knowing that they had not been afforded the same privilege.
Starting off the debate, Senator Godwin Hulse, representing the private sector, pointed out that legislators were being asked to approve a bill based on an agreement between the two BTL companies that they had not seen and which the private entities have the liberty to amend until the Governor General passed the bill into law.
He went on to say that if the Senate goes on to approve the bill, he would then make his appeal to the Governor-General, to not make the bill come into law immediately.
President of the Senate, attorney Philip Zuniga, is currently listed as a director of BTL, and Senator Hulse appealed to him not to exercise his vote in this matter.
Hulse, who is also a shareholder of the existing BTL, said that he does not know that there was any special general meeting where this business transfer from BTL to Telemedia was discussed, and he, certainly, was not invited to attend any.
Senator Hulse also pointed out that there is a pending dispute before the court over the ownership and control of BTL, as well as a court decision on the directorship of BTL.
For him, however, the big issue, is that the Senate was being asked to ratify a bill based on an agreement he has never seen, and that can be amended, according to said bill, up to the time that the Governor- General makes it law. This, he noted, opens the possibility for certain assets and liabilities, covered by the transfer agreement, to be altered.
“How is it anybody could even conceive that we can advance until you show us the agreement? What do we look like, real true rubber stamp?” Senator Hulse questioned.
President of the National Trade Union Congress of Belize (NTUCB), Senator Rene Gomez, said that the workers of BTL, whom the NTUCB represents, were not even informed that the change was going to take place.
He also said that Senators were not being informed who are the parties to the business transfer agreement, and he questioned why the Government was getting legislators involved in a problem between the two dominant shareholders of BTL – Michael Ashcroft and Jeffrey Prosser – while waiving the collection of revenues that would eventually be demanded from taxpayers and workers, who Government will tax to meet whatever revenue shortfalls may arise in the future.
Next, the three Opposition Senators gave their input on the Telemedia bill. Senator Ester Ayuso said that she does not understand the claim made by Hon. Ralph Fonseca, Belize Rural Central area representative and Minister of Public Utilities in the House of Representatives last Friday, that Government was intervening because the telecommunications industry was in turmoil. She pointed to profits BTL continues to make, well in excess of $20 million annually as an indication that the company is doing very well for itself.
Ayuso also objected to legislators getting involved with the dispute between Ashcroft and Prosser that is now before the court.
Senator Debbie McMillan, who also represents the Opposition, said that the Senators need to know the terms of the business transfer agreement. She said that they need to know what will happen to the shares, especially those belonging to the teachers, who have serious concerns about the transformation from BTL to Telemedia.
She said that there is not enough in the document for her to support the bill, and she will not participate in perpetrating a wrong.
The third Opposition Senator, Hon. Diego Bol, also questioned who are the parties to the business transfer agreement, which he also noted can be amended even after the Senate passes the Telemedia bill. He also pointed to the Ashcroft-Prosser litigation still before the court.
Bol went on to say that it was the present Government of Belize that brought Prosser on the scene, and that sold him the special share for one dollar. We note that this purchase, which Prosser made from the Government, gave him special rights on the board of BTL, including two directorships on the board.
Bol said that if an error was made in selling the special share to Prosser, the Senate should not be dragged into trying to erase that error.
PUP Senator, Chanona, said that three salient themes were evident: (1) the public interest, (2) GOB revenue (3) the business transfer agreement.
He said that notwithstanding the litigation between Ashcroft and Prosser, parliament has a responsibility to act to attempt to settle the dispute and stabilize the industry. He added that Government gets more than 20% of its taxes from the telecommunications industry, and the government could not stand by and put the people’s resources in the hands of two moguls who may continue in perpetuity with lawsuits.
Responding to claims that the bill contains a clause under which Government waives the collection revenue it should obtain, including stamp duties, Chanona claimed that the charges do not apply when the business transfer is being made to the same owners – a point upon which those on the other side of the floor begged to differ, since BTL and Telemedia are two separate legal entities.
As regards the business transfer agreement, Chanona said that he thinks it is “a straightforward document between two private entities.” He said that he saw, within the agreement, provisions that take into account the workers’ and shareholders’ interests.
He said that the document, which he said should be tabled at the Senate, was stamped “confidential” and disclosure can only be given at the behest of the partners.
Leader of Government Business, Senator Dickie Bradley, wrapped up the debate. Bradley claimed that there could be no changes in the business transfer agreement that could subvert the bill that was being discussed by the Senate.
While he told his colleagues that the intent in passing the bill is to bring stability to the telecommunications industry, he also said that there is no guarantee that that would be achieved.
The Telemedia bill had also sparked intense debate in the House of Representatives on Friday, when 19 ruling party legislators voted in favor of it, two ruling party members abstained, and 8 Opposition members outrightly rejected it.
Since the much-debated Universal Health Services Motion was withdrawn by the Prime Minister early in Friday’s proceedings, the focus of the debate in the House was also on the Telemedia bill. While it had the support of virtually all members of the ruling party’s side, except for the two that abstained, the Opposition rejected the bill, saying that the Government was attempting to use the legislature to interfere with a matter that was being litigated. Opposition Leader, Hon. Dean Barrow, said that the move violated the principle of separation of powers.
Apart from the Telemedia bill, several other bills were approved in the Senate today. They include the Aquaculture Development Bill 2006 and the Mollejon Hydroelectric Project (Exemption from Taxes and Duties)(Amendment) Bill, 2007. The bills that were passed, including the others that were debated, were passed without any amendments, despite some suggestions for changes by certain Senators.