“The larger issue is not only about who pays more or less for electricity. It is about how policy changes are introduced and explained. The government’s move to install smart meters across the state is being justified as a measure for transparency and energy efficiency. But without trust and clear public consultation, smart meters may be viewed as tools for surveillance and billing manipulation, not reform.
There is also the question of what “efficiency” really means for households. Air-conditioners are not indulgences anymore; they are responses to rising heat and humidity. A refrigerator runs 24 hours a day to keep food safe. Even lighting, often labeled as a discretionary use, is essential for students studying late or workers returning home after night shifts. To frame these as examples of misuse is to ignore the realities of middle-class and working-class life.”
Power Minister Ramakrishna “Sudin” Dhavalikar’s recent clarification on the Time of Day (TOD) electricity tariff has brought some relief to domestic consumers in Goa. According to the minister, the TOD tariff — which adjusts electricity rates based on the time of use — will apply only to high-tension and industrial consumers, not to households or small businesses. He dismissed as “confusion” the reports about a 20 per cent night-time surcharge and a 20 percent daytime rebate, saying no such hike or change will affect ordinary Goans.
At first glance, this appears to be a sensible reassurance. Electricity is an essential service, and any hint of a new billing system often sparks public anxiety. Yet the minister’s statement also raises deeper questions about transparency, communication, and the logic behind how the government defines “efficient use” or “misuse” of power.
If the intention behind TOD billing is to promote energy efficiency, then it is important to define what that means in the Goan context. In industrial or commercial setups, TOD tariffs can indeed help reduce peak demand. For example, factories that shift operations to off-peak hours can ease the load on the grid. However, applying the same principle to domestic use is far more complicated. People use electricity at night for reasons that have nothing to do with waste. Fans, refrigerators, and lights are not luxuries; they are daily necessities. Suggesting that night-time consumption is misuse reflects a misunderstanding of how ordinary homes function.
Dhavalikar has said he is “not afraid of any political attack,” dismissing the criticism from the Opposition as uninformed. But the criticism itself is not baseless. Public confusion over TOD tariffs arose because official communication was inconsistent. Reports suggesting that night-time consumption could attract a surcharge spread quickly, creating fear among households already struggling with high living costs. The government could have avoided this panic with timely, clear, and accessible information. Instead, what followed were clarifications and counter-statements — the kind of reactive communication that too often characterizes governance in Goa.
The larger issue is not only about who pays more or less for electricity. It is about how policy changes are introduced and explained. The government’s move to install smart meters across the state is being justified as a measure for transparency and energy efficiency. But without trust and clear public consultation, smart meters may be viewed as tools for surveillance and billing manipulation, not reform.
There is also the question of what “efficiency” really means for households. Air-conditioners are not indulgences anymore; they are responses to rising heat and humidity. A refrigerator runs 24 hours a day to keep food safe. Even lighting, often labeled as a discretionary use, is essential for students studying late or workers returning home after night shifts. To frame these as examples of misuse is to ignore the realities of middle-class and working-class life.
Dhavalikar’s assurance that domestic users will not see a tariff hike is welcome, but it should come with a broader commitment to public education about how the new systems work. People need to know what smart meters record, how data is used, and what protections exist against errors or inflated bills. In other states, the rollout of smart meters has faced public backlash precisely because of billing confusion and technical issues. Goa must learn from those experiences rather than repeat them.
At the same time, the Opposition’s reaction should be more constructive. Rather than simply attacking the government, political parties could demand an open consultation process — one that involves civil society groups, consumer forums, and energy experts. Public policy works best when it is explained, debated, and shaped through participation, not surprise.
Electricity is not just a commodity; it is a social necessity. Any move to change how it is priced must be guided by empathy and clarity, not by slogans about modernization or efficiency. If the government wants to build public confidence, it must speak clearly and consistently, not just when faced with backlash.
In the end, this is not about whether Sudin Dhavalikar is “afraid” of political attacks. It is about whether the government is ready to engage honestly with citizens about policies that affect their everyday lives. Smart meters and TOD tariffs may be tools of the future, but transparency and trust are timeless requirements of good governance.
