After a year of consultation, Victoria’s Essential Services Commission’s (ESC) final report on its hardship inquiry was tabled in State Parliament on Tuesday. It looked at how energy retailers support consumers who experience difficulties paying their bills.
The report, “Supporting customers, avoiding labels”, proposes a new framework for hardship in Victoria and focuses on the scope of assistance offered by retailers, delivery of customer assistance, monitoring and reporting.
The ESC work has highlighted the complexity and challenge of identifying and then providing timely assistance to consumers who genuinely need support to manage their energy bills. Ultimately, hardship and affordability issues are a shared responsibility between industry, the government (which provides concessions) and consumer and welfare groups, who can help with better targeting of support.
The ESC is now looking at designing and revising regulatory instruments, such as new interim payment plan performance indicators, a consumer energy code on payment difficulties, new industry guidelines, revising disconnection operating procedures and Guaranteed Service Levels.
The framework is set to be implemented on 1 July 2017. From now until then, there is still a comprehensive amount of consultation to be undertaken with the Commission, government, industry and consumer groups to go through the practical implementation to transition to the proposed framework.
The stated purpose of the new framework is to assist customers experiencing difficulty to avoid long-term debt, repay debt that accrues, while, wherever possible, maintaining access to power.
In making the case for a new framework, the ESC has argued that the previous hardship programs have been “too often, and increasingly so, hardship programs simply provide a stepping stone towards disconnection rather than an avenue away from it”.
It points to the most recent available data for 2013-14 which showed 58,503 customers were disconnected for non-payment of energy bills[i].
Disconnection remains an option of last resort for energy companies and when considering the disconnections for customers on instalment plans and those experiencing multiple disconnections within two years (which are used as indicators of those in financial difficulty) these have trended down[ii].
The ESC acknowledged this in its report, but also commented that the fall in the number of customers who had multiple disconnections over two years that they are able to arrange an instalment plan to avoid future disconnection.
To meet the Government’s policy expectation of “wherever possible, energy consumers remain connected to supply, and that disconnection of customers is only used as a measure of last resort”, the ESC framework involves:
The scope of assistance is outlined in the report and shown here:
The ESC points to the addition of two new protections for consumers under its framework, specifically automatically putting consumers onto a payment plan and the use of prepayment plans in the final stage as “an ultimate safety net”.
The ESC believes a retailer should be able to consider disconnecting a consumer if:
The final report has set out an implementation roadmap for the framework which is shown below:
Australia’s energy system reform continues to be dominated by consumer energy resource (CER) integration. The Draft Prototype National Technical Regulatory Framework for CER proposes a unified national approach to device standards, to device accreditation and to data visibility. For retailers this is both a tightening of compliance obligations and potentially improves commercial opportunity, whilst for their customers it promises the potential for safer, more reliable and more transparent CER products and services. We expand on the core implications, and elaborate on the practical outcomes for customers, for retailers, and other stakeholders.
As the Federal Government pursues its productivity agenda, environmental approval processes are under scrutiny. While faster approvals could help, they will remain subject to judicial review. Traditionally, judicial review battles focused on fossil fuel projects, but in recent years it has been used to challenge and delay clean energy developments. This plot twist is complicating efforts to meet 2030 emissions targets and does not look like going away any time soon. Here, we examine the politics of judicial review, its impact on the energy transition, and options for reform.
In June the Federal Government announced it would review the Default Market Offer methodology used by the Australian Energy Regulator to set the safety net price for 8-9 per cent of households who are not able to or who do not go onto competitive market offers. The review is considering bringing the DMO closer to the approach used to set the separate Victorian Default Offer. To better understand the differences between DMO and VDO and help inform the review, the Australian Energy Council commissioned Ernst & Young (EY) to assess the different methodologies. Here Jo De Silva considers the report findings and the broader implications of the proposed changes, as well as other options for price reform.
Send an email with your question or comment, and include your name and a short message and we'll get back to you shortly.