BELIZE’S POWER SQUEEZE: MORE PUBLIC MONEY—WHERE IS THE RELIEF?

As hydroelectric output falls below expectations, Belizeans deserve a full accounting of the borrowing, investments and emergency spending committed to securing their electricity.

Analysis and Editorial 

Belize City: Thursday 4th November 2026

Belizeans have a right to demand more than another financing announcement while the country’s electricity supply remains under pressure. They deserve to know how much public money is committed, what obligations accompany it, and when those commitments will deliver dependable electricity at an affordable cost.

• Public ownership carries a public responsibility. Government cannot invoke the people’s ownership of BEL when financial support is required, then treat those same people as spectators when decisions, costs and results must be explained.

The latest hydroelectric warning makes that accounting urgent.

• A local news reported on November 4 that BEL Chairman Lynn Young estimates hydro generation is approximately 50% below what would normally be expected at this time of year, following inadequate rainfall. That is a comparison with expected hydro output; it does not mean Belize has lost half its total electricity supply. Young also acknowledged that similarly difficult hydro conditions have been managed before. The report establishes a serious supply challenge, rather than proof of an inevitable national blackout. 
• But keeping electricity available through more expensive replacement sources creates a second problem: how to pay for it.

The cost is visible in the regulator’s own figures

• The PUC’s November COPA decision provides a revealing account of electricity purchased during April–September 2026. BEL-Westlake supplied 12.4% at an average cost of BZ$0.8279 per kWh. Mollejon and Chalillo supplied 12.2% at BZ$0.2797 per kWh, while Vaca supplied 5.5% at BZ$0.3094. CFE supplied 47.6% at an average BZ$0.2134 per kWh. These are source costs for the review period, not household retail tariffs or guarantees of future prices. 

Those figures show why an electricity system can remain operational while its finances deteriorate. Replacing missing hydroelectric energy with costly fuel-fired generation can keep businesses open and refrigerators running, but it adds pressure to the cost of supply.

• They also require care in describing Mexico’s role. BEL reports higher Mexican electricity prices as a financial pressure, yet the PUC’s six-month figures show CFE’s average cost below the listed hydro and Westlake averages. A period average does not establish the price or availability of electricity at the evening peak. Government and BEL should publish both, so the public can understand the actual replacement options.

Buying ownership does not add generating capacity

The 2025 Belize Electricity Investments Act authorised Government’s acquisition of the Fortis hydro company and its 33.3% BEL shareholding. It charged the purchase and related costs to the Consolidated Revenue Fund and authorised Treasury bills and notes to finance the acquisitions. 

• That financing framework matters. Domestic borrowing still creates obligations to repay principal and meet financing costs. Keeping lenders within Belize does not remove the claim on future public resources.
• Acquiring existing generating assets can provide strategic control and financial benefits. However, the transfer of ownership does not itself create another generating plant or increase rainfall. A persuasive case for public ownership must therefore show how control, retained earnings, contractual changes and investment improve the service people receive.
• Government should publish the acquisition’s actual financing costs, income received, savings achieved and remaining obligations. It should explain how those results compare with the projections used to justify the purchase, including what happens in a low-rainfall year.

The BZ$73 million question

•  Another report on October 28 stated that Government’s preference-share arrangement involves 8,138,020 shares at BZ$9 each—approximately BZ$73.24 million. Public Utilities CEO Dr Leroy Almendarez described shareholder funding as the available route after discussing the difficulties of raising tariffs or obtaining further commercial borrowing. The report links BEL’s financial pressures to obligations to suppliers, including CFE and Hydro Belize. 

A preference-share investment is not the same transaction as a loan to BEL. Nor does the investment amount alone prove that Government borrowed an identical sum to finance it. The funding source, terms, disbursement dates and expected returns must be disclosed.

Yet the public accountability remains. Money placed in BEL is money committed on the public’s behalf. Clearing supplier arrears may be necessary to protect service, but the public deserves a breakdown showing how much supports existing obligations and how much finances improvements that reduce future vulnerability.

BEL said it needed an additional BZ$20 million to meet CFE obligations. That report does not establish a newly approved Government loan or payment. Before adding it to any headline total, Government and BEL must explain whether it overlaps with existing arrears or support arrangements. 

• Belize needs a reconciled account, not a sum assembled from announcements about different transactions.

Consumers remain exposed

• The PUC’s November order maintains COPA at BZ$0.0151 per kWh for November 1–30, excluding the Social Rate category. That order does not approve the separate request to increase the ceiling. [2]
• The consultation notice describes BEL’s proposed ceiling of BZ$0.0301 per kWh. Raising a ceiling is not an automatic 10% increase in every electricity bill. [6]

For illustration, at 300 kWh, a 1.51-cent COPA charge equals BZ$4.53. At 3.01 cents, it equals BZ$9.03: a difference of BZ$4.50, assuming the proposed maximum were applied to all 300 kWh. This calculation covers COPA alone and excludes taxes and other bill components; it is not a prediction of an approved bill.

• Households could therefore face public financing commitments alongside direct electricity adjustments. Businesses facing higher costs may also pass some of those costs into their prices. The extent will vary, but the mechanism is clear: supporting the electricity system can affect Belizeans beyond the monthly BEL bill.

The plan must survive the next dry season

The report said BEL’s assessment that supply will remain tight into mid-2027, with March–May expected to be the hardest period. BEL describes the outlook as manageable. That is an assessment which must be backed by an operational plan, with enough detail for the public to judge its credibility. 

• Government cannot control the rain. It can account for how rainfall risk was incorporated into financing and generation planning. BEL can explain available supply, reserves, replacement costs and the conditions that would require load shedding.

Solar and storage projects should be assessed against firm delivery dates, their contribution at the hours of greatest need, and their expected effect on costs. Announced capacity is only useful to the immediate crisis when it becomes available to serve consumers.

Publish the account. Deliver the service.

National Perspective Belize calls for Government, BEL and the relevant public entities to publish:

• A reconciled financial statement: Government borrowing, BEL borrowing, guarantees, equity investments, supplier arrears and disbursements, with overlaps removed.
• The cost of financing: Interest, maturities, repayment schedules, fees and expected dividends or other returns supporting repayment.
• The dry-season supply plan: Reservoir assumptions, dependable generation, import availability, reserves and load-shedding triggers.
• A delivery schedule: Each generation and storage project, responsible entity, expected operating date and estimated cost of electricity delivered.
• Consumer safeguards: How proposed charges are tested for reasonable costs, how vulnerable consumers are protected, and how lower costs would reach bills.

Public borrowing can serve a sound purpose. Public investment can build lasting value. Both must be judged against documented costs and results.

• Belizeans should not have to accept growing financial exposure on the strength of assurances alone. If Government says public ownership is the answer, it must show the public the accounts and the benefits.

The people’s ownership of BEL must mean a right to answers, a right to oversight and a measurable improvement in electricity service. It cannot become an open-ended obligation to finance the next shortfall.

By: Omar Silva – Editorial Director/ Publisher @ www.nationalperspectivebz.com

National Perspective Belize – Digital | ©