PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Electricity, multinationals and development By David Hall Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU) University of Greenwich, UK, On behalf of Public Services International April 2009

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Multinationals De-regulation, liberalisation and privatisation Electricity and development Other issues PSI strategy

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Multinationals USA and EU electricity companies expand 1990s –USA companies expand into UK, rest of Europe, Latin America, Asia Most active are Enron & AES, but also TXU, PPL, etc –EU companies expand into USA, Latin America, Asia Most active:EDF & Spanish companies: Endesa, Iberdrola, Union Fenosa Most withdraw after 2000 –1. inadequate profits 2. public and political resistance, uncertainty –USA companies exit UK and Europe, USA and EU try to exit Latin America, but few buyers Remaining multinational activity in 2009 –EU companies in N. America –mixed picture in developing countries: some remaining MNCs, some private equity, some renationalised EU companies have European Works Councils with union representation –Can leverage this for international benefit e.g. EdF

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril EU electricity companies operating in USA 2009 European group Home country USA subsidiaries EDFFranceConstellation nuclear plants (49.99%) Nuclear plants E.OnGermanyLG&E, Kentucky Util Electric/gas generation, distribution, supply:Kentucky GDF-SuezFranceSuez Energy, SEGNA Elec generation, commercial retail, gas distribution IberdrolaSpainEnergy EastElectric/gas generation, distribution, supply:N-E USA National GridUKNational Grid, LIPA Electric/gas transmission in N-E USA (+Long Island supply

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril EU: problems with liberalisation and privatisation EU directive liberalises electricity/gas since 1998 –wholesale/retail deregulation, unbundling of public monopolies –Compulsory in all countries and cities “It is highly questionable that gas and electricity prices are the result of a truly competitive process rather than being the direct result of decision of companies with market power. … London Economics study states that these prices "are significantly higher than would be expected on perfectly competitive markets"...” (EU Commission 2007) No evidence of benefits from privatisation or liberalisation –no consumer gains, consumer satisfaction higher under public ownership, similar for gas and telecoms (Florio et al, Univ Milan) –Retail consumers reluctant to switch –Vertical integration of generation and retail continues

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril USA: deregulation and price of electricity Marilyn Showalter: Price Trends For Industrial Electricity Deregulated state prices were 35% higher, now 56% higher Consumers do not switch from utilities 26 states do not deregulate 7 defer deregulation 8/17 deregulated states debate changes e.g. end retail choice, allow vertical reintegration also bad experience with wholesale deregulation: California 2000 cartel, price spikes, bankrupt distributors, blackouts (except Los Angeles with vertically integrated municipal utility)

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Electricity and development - the need for electric light and power

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Problems with multinationals in developing countries Multinationals: –Corruption e.g. IPP power plants in Indonesia, Pakistan, India –Casualisation of workers e.g. Argentina –evidence shows that private sector is not more efficient than public sector –no investments because not profitable, withdraw and/or claim compensation –Note problems of prices, exits e.g. AES Uganda –distributor privatised to Eskom (South Africa) + Globeleq (UK govt) –price increases, under- investment, only 10% connected –generation relies on IPPs (Eskom+), & diesel generators (Aggreko) Nicaragua –Distributors privatised to Union Fenosa (Spain) –blackouts, arbitrary bills, partial renationalisation Thailand –Strong union campaign against power privatisation, part of movement against corrupt president Thaksin

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Public finance for investment in systems Electricity (and roads) key for development –Economic, social and markets (for electrical goods) –50% of all efficiency gains in USA economy 1920s-1970s due to (mainly public) investment in electricity & roads Government investment needed for extension of system –Private sector funds little –Brazil: central government funding: ‘Luz para todos’ (Light for All) –South Africa funds rural electrification through tax and cross-subsidy Aid: –IMF, World Bank, USA, EU donors: lend on condition of privatisation and liberalisation –China is now alternative source of aid, without policy conditions

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril PSI strategic approach LEVELSTRATEGYACTION Local and national Support affiliatesSupport for Thai union campaigns against privatisation, Nigerian union alternative plans, evidence to Indonesia constitutional court, links with NGOs eg Prayas (India) RegionalCoordinatePressure on development banks; regional meetings Africa 2006/07, Latin America 2007, Asia-Pacific research support GlobalRepresentation, campaigns and research PSI representation on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) electricity working group, research on multinational companies

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Other issues Energy sources –Renewables: greater concerns re global warming –energy security: EU concerns re Russia, –nuclear power: expansion and promotion Economic crisis –Lower demand for electricity –Difficulty of refinancing debts –Infrastructure spending to counter recession e.g. on transmission lines, new green energy sources –General problem:wages share falling, profits share rising Reversal key to boost demand

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril Public confidence in free market and unions: September 2007 Financial Times survey

PSIRU UWUA Power for AmericaApril More about PSI and PSIRU Information about PSI affiliates and campaigns are published on the website at PSIRU reports are published on the unit’s website Thank you