In an article published in Business Recorder dated September 3, 2025, the author has rightly appreciated the government’s efforts in improving crisis response, strengthening administration, and reducing tariffs; however, on the contrary, it has also raised concerns regarding CTBCM, portraying it as an illusion.

While acknowledging progress is important, dismissing CTBCM as an ‘illusion’ overlooks its carefully designed framework and the critical role it plays in ensuring long-term efficiency, transparency, and sustainability of the power market of Pakistan.

In the same article, the author further suggested that for CTBCM to succeed, three conditions are necessary:

(a) Discos to be given ring-fenced supply arms,

(b) capacity payment distortions to be addressed, and

(c) subsidies to be phased out transparently.

These points reflect a clear lack of understanding of author about competitive electricity markets.

The proposal to allow DISCOs ring-fenced supply arms goes against the purpose of competition. International experience shows that whenever distribution companies are allowed to be competitive suppliers as well, the competition was weakened. For example, the Competition Commissions of France and Turkey found that this practice limited consumer choice, discouraged new entrants, and preserved monopoly structures. Such an approach would reduce opportunities for private suppliers and harm consumers in the long run.

Secondly, shifting capacity payment costs mainly to industries contradicts the aim of supporting competitiveness. Globally, capacity costs are shared across all consumers to maintain fairness. Placing this burden only on industries would raise their tariffs, weaken their ability to compete regionally and internationally, and also hurt exports especially at a time when mechanisms like CBAM already challenge Pakistan’s exports.

The call for subsidy reform is understandable but lies outside CTBCM’s design. Subsidies are political and social decisions meant to protect vulnerable consumers and exist in nearly all developing countries regardless of market reforms. CTBCM’s role is not to abolish subsidies but to create efficiency and transparency in procurement, while subsidy decisions remain with policymakers.

Taken together, these recommendations are inconsistent, calling for more competition while suggesting measures that would limit it or increase costs for industries. By contrast, CTBCM provides a transparent, rules-based, and internationally aligned framework where all players such as........

© Business Recorder