‘ALL OF US OR NONE OF US!’ Social Partners draw line on Cabinet meeting over BTL-Smart deal

It is ostensibly “all of us or none of us” for Belize's Social Partners, which have told the Government that any Cabinet meeting over BTL's proposed Speednet acquisition must include representatives from all four groups.

The position follows an invitation from the Government for only the Belize Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCCI) and National Trade Union Congress of Belize (NTUCB) to meet with Cabinet on Thursday, August 13.

But in a joint statement, the BCCI and NTUCB, together with the Belize Network of Non-Governmental Organizations (BNN) and National Evangelical Association of Belize (NEAB), said any consideration of a meeting must include representation from all four Social Partner groups, consistent with their collective approach to the controversial acquisition.

The groups have not rejected talks with Cabinet. Instead, their statement effectively makes collective representation a condition for their participation, while also maintaining that information they previously requested remains outstanding. Those requests include financial statements and independent valuation reports related to Belize Telemedia Limited's proposed $80 million acquisition of Speednet Communications Limited, operator of the SMART telecommunications brand.

The Social Partners said they also expect reasonable time to review the requested information once it is provided before participating in discussions with Cabinet.

The groups similarly welcomed the Public Utilities Commission's willingness to engage in further discussions but referred the regulator to requests contained in their August 6 statement as the basis for continued stakeholder engagement.

A day after the joint release, however, the BCCI issued a separate statement to clarify another aspect of the developing disagreement: the Chamber said it has not refused to meet with Cabinet. The clarification followed suggestions that BCCI had declined or expressed an unwillingness to participate in Thursday's proposed meeting.

According to the Chamber, both its President and Chief Executive Officer have longstanding commitments as members of an official Belize delegation travelling to El Salvador through Friday, August 14.

The delegation includes representatives from Government and the private sector and is participating in the formal signing of the Belize-El Salvador Partial Scope Agreement, aimed at strengthening bilateral trade and creating additional commercial opportunities for Belizean businesses.

The BCCI said it consequently requested that Thursday's meeting be rescheduled and rejected any characterisation of that request as an unwillingness to engage. It maintained that it remains prepared to consult fully with Cabinet and sees no reason meaningful engagement cannot occur before a final Cabinet decision on the proposed acquisition. The Chamber said it stands ready to convene alongside the other Social Partners before Cabinet's next deliberation on Tuesday, August 18, at a mutually agreeable time.

Its separate clarification therefore appears consistent with the collective position taken a day earlier: the Social Partners are willing to meet, but are seeking to do so together and after receiving information they say is necessary to properly assess the proposed transaction.

The disagreement over the meeting comes against the wider controversy surrounding BTL's attempt to acquire its principal private-sector telecommunications competitor. BTL has defended the proposal on commercial grounds, arguing that its existing telecommunications network has substantial excess capacity and could absorb Speednet's approximately 100,000 customers while reducing duplicated infrastructure and operating costs.

The Social Partners have concentrated instead on concerns surrounding market competition, transparency, governance, regulatory oversight and the broader public interest.

The BCCI said Wednesday that those substantive positions remain unchanged and that it continues to advocate for thorough responses to the concerns raised. The immediate impasse, however, is now over who gets a seat at the table—and whether the Social Partners will receive the information and review time they are demanding before Cabinet proceeds further with the proposed acquisition.