In relation to that very statement from the PUC, the independent senators pushed back strongly, questioning both the timing and intent of the regulator’s latest move regarding the telecommunications sector. Speaking to reporters, Union Senator Glenfield Dennison took aim at the PUC’s market analysis and its call for public feedback on market dominance, arguing that neither should be the regulator’s primary focus at this stage. Dennison accused the PUC of engaging in what he described as a maneuver designed to give the appearance of transparency, rather than addressing what he says is the real issue. He pointed to the Prime Minister’s recent public admission that a Cabinet paper and Statutory Instrument had already been advanced to declare Belize Telemedia Limited a dominant provider, an action that would then compel the PUC to regulate pricing. According to Dennison, the current steps being taken by the regulator are being “dressed up” as consultation, even as key decisions appear to have already been made.
Glenfield Dennison, Union Senator: “I invite and I don’t think PUC cares what I think, I invite the members of the PUC to shift your lens away from thinking that the answer is regulating a dominant actor in telecom. They put out a real nice release saying that they are going to be looking at market dominance and so let’s be very clear. Go back and read the legislation sir and understand and appreciate that your role sir is not to create a dominant actor an then regulate it, your role is to create the market environment so that competition thrives and in a situation where through competition one dominant provide kills the competition fair and square that is where your power to regulate and price cap ought to come in. And where competition results in one player, then you regulate them.
PUC stop playing. Stop playing. I think they’re playing. I think they missed that, this discussion ought not to have been happening about whether or not BTL will buy Smart and then invite the PUC. PUC ought to have been at the front of this. They’re not to ratify a decision for one dominant actor to buy out somebody with less market share. They were to lead that conversation after they determined whether that’s in the best interest of the industry not after. So now I don’t even think forty two permits them to come to the public. There are other sections in the law which they are required to do, gazette notices, and wait for a period of public comment and so. Forty two is not one of them. I don’t know how they got that. So I just see it as a PR stunt.”
Church Senator Louis Wade Jr. echoed concerns over the regulator’s independence, raising the issue of what he described as political interference within the PUC. Wade warned that regulatory bodies must remain insulated from political direction, especially on matters as significant as market dominance and potential industry consolidation. He stressed that public confidence in the regulatory process depends on the perception, and the reality of independence, fairness, and due process.
Rev’d Louis Wade, Churches Senator: “To me like PUC is losing its standing in the public’s eyes because PUC is only now coming public with their first temporary position and making requests when people have already now been protesting in front of telemedia and so this is why I am saying that you have a problem where the perception that PUC is government-controlled because it is government-appointed. So now, rather than PUC take a bold step forward, it has waited so long that it looks as if it’s waiting on a signal from cabinet or it’s waiting on a signal from the government-owned private entity, BTL. And so it does need to shift because if BTL is not yet a monopoly and it’s already causing PUC to slow down and not carry out its role, how will PUC act when BTL becomes a monopoly? And we’ve been there. So I’m old enough to know that they held back VoIP, Voice over IP for years and held back the economy of the country. The world was ahead of us because PUC and the BTL, you have this monopoly government and government control and so they are not acting in the best interest of the people of Belize. They are not acting in the best interest of the economy. They were acting in best interest of the shareholders and this has happened over and over and over and so it disappoints me that in 2025-2026 we are back here having this very same conversation.”
The senators’ comments come amid heightened national debate over Belize Telemedia Limited’s proposed acquisition of SMART and follow closely on the heels of broader concerns being raised by unions, opposition figures, and civil society groups.
Read more on Love FM | News & Music Power
