Heyliger-Marten: eliminating port's throughput fee would save average household just Cg 6.20 monthly

GREAT BAY--Minister of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication (TEATT) Grisha Heyliger-Marten has cautioned that reducing or even eliminating Port St. Maarten's throughput fee on fuel supplied to GEBE would provide only marginal relief to electricity consumers, arguing that the real potential for savings lies in examining the broader fuel supply arrangement, including supplier charges, markups and the country's dependence on a single fuel provider.

Responding to questions from Members of Parliament during the continuation of the 2027 national budget debate, Heyliger-Marten said the throughput fee accounts for just 1.3% of GEBE's monthly fuel expenditure. She explained that even if the Port were to eliminate the charge entirely and the full savings were passed on to customers, a household consuming 1,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity would save approximately Cg 6.20, or US$3.44, per month.

The Minister's explanation came in response to a parliamentary question about whether Port St. Maarten could lower its throughput fee and whether doing so would reduce the cost of electricity for consumers.

"The short answer is yes, the port can lower its throughput fee and yes, that can reduce the cost of electricity," Heyliger-Marten said, before emphasizing that the more important question is how much consumers would actually save.

According to the Minister, GEBE spends approximately US$7.5 million each month purchasing fuel to generate electricity. Of that amount, approximately US$100,000 represents the throughput fee collected by Port St. Maarten.

She explained that a household consuming 1,000 kilowatt-hours currently pays approximately Cg 477 in fuel-related charges alone. Completely removing the Port's fee would reduce that amount by approximately Cg 6.20, assuming the entire reduction reaches consumers.

The Minister stressed that while any reduction in electricity costs would be welcome, the figures demonstrate why concentrating primarily on the Port's throughput fee would not deliver the level of relief households are seeking.

Minister Wants Greater Scrutiny of Fuel Supplier Charges

Heyliger-Marten said the discussion should instead focus on the full pricing structure governing fuel supplied to GEBE, particularly the charges applied between the Port and the utility company.

She questioned what additional costs and markups are included in the fuel price and whether those charges are fair, reasonable and justified.

The Minister also highlighted the consequences of relying heavily on a single fuel supplier, explaining that limited competition reduces the market forces that would ordinarily help drive prices downward.

She argued that the country's electricity consumers ultimately bear the financial consequences of those arrangements through their monthly utility bills.

The Minister pointed to the ongoing work of the Bureau Telecommunications and Post (BTP), which has been tasked with examining the fuel pricing structure and the costs passed on to GEBE.

According to Heyliger-Marten, the review is important because it will help establish a clearer understanding of how fuel prices are determined and where opportunities for meaningful savings may exist.

"We cannot continue focusing on the port's relatively small fee while leaving the much larger fuel supply arrangements without the same level of scrutiny," she told Parliament.

She said the objective is to establish greater transparency, encourage competition and explore the possibility of GEBE eventually developing its own fuel storage capacity, which could reduce dependence on a single supplier.

Such measures, she suggested, could offer more substantial long-term benefits than adjustments to the Port's existing throughput fee.

BTP Review Central to Finding Real Savings

Heyliger-Marten said the ongoing examination of fuel pricing represents an important step toward identifying the factors contributing to St. Maarten's high electricity costs.

The Minister acknowledged that a year earlier she would not have been equipped with the information necessary to provide Parliament with such a detailed breakdown of the throughput fee's impact.

She said this demonstrated the importance of the regulatory review and the need for decisions to be guided by financial information rather than assumptions about where the largest costs originate.

Her comments also placed renewed attention on the relationship between GEBE, its fuel supplier and the regulatory authorities responsible for examining the utility company's cost structure.

Although eliminating the throughput fee could produce a small reduction in electricity bills, the Minister maintained that the greater opportunity lies in understanding and addressing the costs associated with the overall fuel supply chain.

"If we truly want to lower electricity bills, we must stop looking only at what the port charges and start examining what GEBE is being charged," Heyliger-Marten said.

She concluded her response by urging patience with the ongoing BTP examination, expressing confidence that the exercise could identify opportunities for more meaningful savings.

"Let me cook," the Minister remarked, borrowing a popular expression to emphasize that the work underway should be allowed to produce results.

For consumers struggling with electricity costs, her central message was that the throughput fee represents only a small fraction of GEBE's fuel expenditure and that meaningful reductions will require closer scrutiny of the larger financial arrangements driving the price of electricity on St. Maarten.

‍