KEY POINTS:
Many of the circumstances of the tragic death of Folole Muliaga remain mired in uncertainty. Only the finding of the several investigations now being made will establish what, if any, blame for her death can be attached to Mercury Energy, which turned off the electricity at her Mangere
home. But we already know enough to conclude that the power company was less than reasonable in its dealings with her family. Its approach to the Muliagas smacks of an operation accustomed to dealing in black and white, not the shades of grey necessary in highly sensitive situations.
Two important matters seem not to be in dispute. First, the contractor who turned off the power at Mrs Muliaga's home knew or should have known, that she had a medical tube in her nose. He was also surely aware, as he spoke to her after cutting off the power, that her oxygen machine's emergency warning was blaring, indicating it was about to shut down. The contractor may not have been aware that Mrs Muliaga was being treated for cardiomyopathy, but the presence of the machine should have alerted him to a serious health issue. At that point, caution should have dictated further inquiry before the power was turned off.
It is largely irrelevant to say Mrs Muliaga's family should have arranged immediately for her to be sent to a hospital. The fact that she soon began to feel unwell and that hospitalisation should have been required reinforces the errant nature of the disconnection. Even if she had been whisked quickly to hospital and made a full recovery, the company would still have been culpable for an act that endangered her life.
The second important matter is the obvious efforts the Muliagas were making to pay their electricity bill. This was not a family of beneficiaries intent on welching on the system. Despite their straitened circumstances, they had made an attempt to satisfy Mercury. An account dated May 23 showed they owed a total of $304.40, but $136 of that was not due until June 13, leaving $168.40 overdue. But crucially, the entire sum of $304.40 is listed as "amount due if received after 13 June". It is not unreasonable, surely, to read that as meaning that that, full, sum could be paid after June 13. It also showed the family had made two payments last month, $61.90 on May 2 and $45 on May 18, just two weeks ago. That effort, a far cry from deliberate avoidance, should have merited a large dollop of respect from Mercury, not the matter-of-fact treatment.
Inevitably, the tragedy has led to all sorts of over-reaction. Radical measures have been suggested to ensure the occurrence is not repeated. Prominent among these is the idea that power companies should be banned from cutting off electricity. Such is the case in some Canadian provinces, where the severe winters make the loss of power life-threatening. Such a step is hardly needed in New Zealand. Indeed, it would send the wrong message about the payment of bills.
What is required is a set of protocols that demands a high degree of flexibility and discretion from Mercury and other utility companies. Disconnection may be the ultimate penalty for those who do not deign to pay their bill, and show no intention of ever doing so. But there will be many situations involving hardship where it is inappropriate, particularly where householders are trying to fulfil their responsibilities. Companies such as Mercury should have arrangements to cater for those who fall behind with their payments but show a determination to retrieve the situation.
Therein lies the real tragedy of the death of Folole Muliaga. Mercury has every right to demand payment for the electricity it supplies. But the consequences of disconnection can be fraught, and it has a responsibility to tread carefully when taking this step. In the case of Mrs Muliaga, it failed.
