Struggling families cannot afford even a modest increase in their Belco rates, according to social activist Sheelagh Cooper.

The Coalition for the Protection of Children head gave guarded support to Belco’s announcement that it might raise its rates — but was adamant that residents on the bottom tier were already pushed as far as they could go.

Yesterday’s announcement from the utility company also appeared to go against an assurance from Government, made three months ago, that bills would not rise despite a fuel charge in the Budget.

“Belco’s initiative to lower rates for people who use less electricity was a good thing,” Ms Cooper said, referring to a proposal presented a year ago that offered a drop in rates for those who consumed the least power. “It would be a good thing if they followed the same line of thinking if they raise the rates — if they hold the line on the smaller users. Those are the consumers who can’t sustain any kind of hike.

“Nobody likes to see rates increase, but certainly not this portion of the population.

“We get calls daily from people whose lights have been turned off or are about to be turned off.

“This portion of the population is finding it harder and harder to make ends meet. Larger users of electricity can certainly afford it.”

A year ago, Belco proposed that families who used between zero and 15 kilowatt hours (kWh) per day — about 44 per cent of the company’s residential customers — could expect to save between 5 and 21 per cent from their overall bill under a new pricing regime that would have the largest consumers paying more.

However, under the new proposed residential tariffs, those same consumers — with a total monthly bill of about 300 kWh — would get a 7.3 per cent rise in their bills, with their monthly charges jumping from $107 to $115.

The bigger consumers of 1,500 kWh would see an increase in their bills of more than double that amount: 15.6 per cent, or from $610 a month to $706, meaning that the biggest hit would go to those using the most power.

Grant Gibbons, the Minister for Economic Development, said last night that he was limited in his ability to comment on the proposal, since it lay with the independent Energy Commission to make its recommendation on accepting all or part of Belco’s tariff increases, or turning the plan down.

That organisation would consider the implications of Belco’s offer and give its verdict on whether they were justified.

“Belco have a right of appeal to the minister under the Act,” Dr Gibbons said. “If they’re unhappy with the decision there is an appeal to me. For that reason I would just as soon not comment.”

In March Dr Gibbons issued a statement to residents that a new fuel charge added to the 2015-16 Budget would be offset by the fall in oil prices.

At that time, Belco said that the cost of electricity could drop even more if fuel prices stayed down.

“That was for the fuel adjustment rate, the part that’s directly connected to the price per barrel,” Dr Gibbons said last night.

“The fact of the matter is that the fuel adjustment rate has come down, but the Commission is going to have to study this particular submission to see what the overall impact would be.