My grandmother had a saying: “What happens in the dark eventually comes to light.”

When decisions affect the public’s money, people deserve to know whose interests they serve and who answers for them.

That includes me.

Devonshire North West sent me to Parliament in February 2025. That vote was a responsibility to deliver, not a licence to demand trust. Trust must be earned through decisions people understand and results they can feel.

Electricity is a test of both.

A higher bill means fewer groceries for a pensioner, another squeeze on a parent’s budget and another hurdle for a small business. These are the people electricity policy must serve.

My predecessor, Wayne Caines, served as an elected representative while holding the presidency of Ascendant and, subsequently, Belco. Those overlapping responsibilities demanded clear boundaries. Voters deserved to know how their interests were protected when they differed from the company’s.

That scrutiny applies equally to the Government, the Regulatory Authority and Belco. Different responsibilities do not diminish the duty to explain decisions affecting the same households.

A clearer bill is not enough. The charges must be justified.

On August 1, the monthly facilities charge for customers with distributed generation, including rooftop solar, rose from $52.48 to $148.83.

That is $96.35 more each month, or $1,156.20 a year, in the fixed charge alone. Other charges, usage and credits determine the final bill, but this additional fixed cost is unavoidable for affected households.

Mr Caines has defended the restructuring as a fairer distribution of costs.

Then show the evidence.

Solar customers should pay fairly for the grid they use. Customers without solar should not shoulder an unfair burden. But families encouraged by successive governments to invest in solar deserve to know why their fixed charge has nearly tripled.

What costs justify it? How were they calculated? How does the charge reflect the service provided?

Transparency means answering those questions, not simply giving a charge a name.

Fairness also applies to the feed-in tariff, the credit customers receive for renewable electricity supplied to the grid. Fair charges and fair compensation belong in the same conversation.

In May 2025, I issued a ministerial direction calling for fairer, more transparent cost allocation. Parliament subsequently passed electricity amendments incorporating affordability protections into planning. The National Electricity Sector Policy 2026 is now final.

These reforms must prove their worth through reliable power, justified charges and greater affordability.

The electricity planning process was paused to align it with national policy and affordability objectives. Belco and the Regulatory Authority challenged that decision. Those proceedings have since been withdrawn after the Government incurred hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer-funded legal costs.

The public deserve to know what that dispute achieved.

Mr Caines has spent a lot of time in court lately, some related to energy and otherwise.

On November 12, Mr Caines and his legal team filed an application for an injunction after the Government’s announcement that it would legislate for a fairer feed-in tariff.

The public have the right to scrutinise what it seeks to prevent, whose interests that serves and what it could mean for their bills.

The Government must answer just as clearly for its decisions.

Our mandate was unity, equity and tangible progress. In electricity, equity means paying a fair share of justified costs. Progress means dependable power and more money left for daily life.

The public deserve the evidence. Explain the decisions. Deliver in their interest.

Then let the people judge.

• Alexa Lightbourne is the Minister of Home Affairs and the Progressive Labour Party MP for Devonshire North West