Britain, Environment, Government

Energy firms heavily criticised by MPs on the Energy and Climate Change Committee…

ENERGY FIRMS SLAMMED

A major report by MPs has warned that swingeing green stealth levies on energy bills are ‘perverse’ and should be scrapped.

MPs also call for middle-class pensioners to lose their winter fuel allowance, with the savings redirected to help low-income households insulate their homes.

They have also attacked the regulator OFGEM for failing to hold giant energy firms to account for soaring prices.

The findings were delivered in a report by the Commons energy and climate change committee, which warns that, based on Government estimates, green levies will add a third to electricity prices by 2020 – even before likely rises in wholesale prices are factored in.

The Government has been accused of using stealth taxes to fund the huge subsidies given to green energy firms. These are needed, ministers say, to meet controversial carbon reduction targets set by the last government.

But MPs on the Commons energy and climate committee have warned that most families have no idea that the green energy drive is costing them dear. Their report states:

… There is no widespread understanding by consumers of how much of their bills is made up of levies.

The average family pays £1,267 towards energy bills, with £112 comprising green taxes – £18 of which is directly spent on subsidising giant wind farms. By 2020 the contribution will have increased by more than 150 per cent, with each household estimated to pay £286 as part of their bills, according to the Department for Energy and Climate Change.

The committee’s report also says:

… Increasing use of levies on bills to fund energy and climate policies is problematic since it is likely to hit hardest those least able to pay.

MPs on the committee suggested that if the green subsidies are to continue they should be funded through the tax system which is more transparent and ‘less regressive than the levies’.

The report questions the repeated claims by ministers that families will see lower bills as a result of Government policies, which include measures to promote energy efficiency. The committee is calling on ministers to start an ‘honest conversation’ about the fact that energy bills are highly likely to continue to rise.

Since 2007, average prices of gas and electricity have increased by 41 per cent – 20 per cent in real terms – leaving millions of households in ‘fuel poverty’. MPs warned that the public’s ‘deep mistrust’ of energy providers will continue unless they show greater transparency and reassure households that high prices are not fuelling excessive profits.

The Renewable Energy Foundation, a think tank, says there is little or nothing to be said in favour of energy bill levies. They hurt the poor most, they reduce competition in the energy markets and make supplier-switching less effective. The Energy Foundation says that because the levies camouflage government taxation they reduce democratic accountability.

Green taxes account for nearly 10 per cent of energy bills. They include an EU-imposed levy on industry and power generators for each tonne of carbon dioxide emitted, the cost of which is then passed on to consumers.

Customers also cover the cost of energy companies’ obligation to source more electricity from costly renewable sources – such as offshore wind farms and biofuel, to reduce fossil fuel use – and the requirement for suppliers to install free or subsidised heat saving measure, such as loft insulation or draught-proofing.

Whilst David Cameron has ruled out any change to the winter fuel allowance before the election in 2015, the report by MPs re-opens the debate over whether better-off pensioners should continue to receive the payment which is worth up to £300 a year. The cross-party committee is urging ministers to introduce ‘better targeting of the winter fuel allowance through means-testing’ and to consider ‘how savings could be used to boost investment in energy efficiency programmes’.

MPs also said they were ‘disappointed at OFGEM’s slow progress’ in forcing the energy giants to reveal how much they are making from household bills.

The regulator must ‘use its teeth’ and force energy firms to explain the reasons behind price rises, the report says.

Energy firms were also criticised for ‘falling far short of what is required to increase transparency’ as well as failing to improve consumer trust.

But Energy Secretary Ed Davey has rejected the suggestion that ministers were misleading the public over the impact of green measures on bills. He said:

… Our policies to support renewable energy and reduce energy waste are insulating consumers from the rising cost of fossil fuels.

… And by 2020, our analysis shows household energy bills will on average be £166 lower than they would if we did nothing.

COMMENT

After years of relentless price rises, families across Britain are already struggling to pay electric and gas bills which, on average, include £112 in green taxes and levies.

Yet, as Westminster’s climate and energy committee has warned, this crisis is to get much worse – with the value of these ‘perverse’ levies rocketing by 150 per cent between now and 2020.

On countless occasions, government ministers and supine regulators have promised they will force energy companies to introduce simplified, easily comparable tariffs and bills the public can readily understand.

Yet still the obfuscation goes on. As utility charges soar – along with profits for the Big Six – customers remain saddled with indecipherable bills that leave them dumbfounded over whether they are getting the best deal. Charitable organisations, including the Citizen’s Advisory Service, are receiving record numbers of calls from desperate households struggling with debts, after energy bills have rocketed by as much as 40 per cent in real terms since 2007.

And with yet more increases threatened on top of the 11 per cent so far this year, those on fixed low incomes will suffer the most. How much longer can the authorities stand by while this ruthless exploitation continues?

There are many things that could be done. For instance, minsters could scrap the posturing green taxes that already add £112 to average bills. This could be done at a stroke. The regulator, OFGEM, could also do far more by ensuring gas and electricity companies are more transparent and straightforward in their dealings.

Standard
Britain, Foreign Affairs, Government, Military, National Security, Syria, United States

Arming the Syrian rebels is looking less likely…

SYRIAN REBELS

Downing Street has ditched plans to arm the Syrian rebels after the Prime Minister has been warned that there is little point sending weapons unless he is prepared for all-out war with the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

General Sir David Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff, along with other commanders believe that sending small arms or ground-to-air missiles will hardly be worth it, since it would it would make little difference to the outcome of the conflict. Military chiefs have also said that even options like a no-fly zone (NFZ) would require air attacks on Syrian defences that would last weeks or even months.

The assassination last week of Kamal Hamami, a top commander of the Syrian Free Army, by a hardline group linked to Al-Qaeda, has compounded anxieties over plans by Britain and other Western countries to give military help to rebels fighting the Assad regime. Those fears are aggravated by the possibility that weapons and expertise provided to the rebels could be turned against the UK and her allies by radical Islamists. There are also growing rivalries between the Syrian Free Army and Islamists, who have sometimes joined forces on the battlefield.

But senior ministers and Whitehall officials have revealed that the Coalition is drawing up plans to help train and advise ‘moderate’ elements of the opposition forces who continue to battle with Assad’s forces.

The British Prime Minister has been keen to act on Syria and demanded last month an end to the EU arms embargo on the country to give him options. The EU reluctantly relented, but sending weapons to the beleaguered rebels in Syria remains an option open to the prime minister if parliament was to approve, though that does seem a remote possibility at the present moment given the lack of support among Tory whips.

Following a meeting of the National Security Council, in which British military commanders were asked to present options on the conflict, the Government was told that although it might make them feel better (by sending weapons) it was hardly worth it in terms of altering the balance of forces on the ground. Whilst Syria is known to have good air defences, military chiefs have also said that engaging Syria militarily would mean weeks of bombing and air strikes. A decision to engage is one that couldn’t be undertaken half-heartedly.

But given the lack of organisation within the rebel movement, training and advising the rebels remain district possibilities for Britain. The UK is concentrating on areas where it feels it has the expertise to contribute. The supply of weapons into Syria is continuing to be made by Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

It is understood that military advisers could be stationed in Jordon to advise Syria rebel leaders on strategy and tactics. UK chiefs are wary of being accused of having British boots on the ground in Syria or by making any ground incursion into the country.

Ministers believe it could take 18 months of further conflict before Assad is forced to the negotiating table. The civil war has already claimed more than 100,000 lives with millions more displaced on the borders with neighbouring countries.

There is also frustration about the approach taken by US Secretary of State John Kerry in pushing regime figures to the negotiating table. There is little idea of the solution Mr Kerry is seeking. Knowing where you are trying to get to in order to get there should surely be central in any negotiations over Syria, but this underpinning remains distinctly absent even after almost three years of intense fighting.

Standard
Britain, Google, Government

Government sets out a discussion paper on how the census might be replaced…

THE DEMISE OF THE TRADITIONAL CENSUS?

Every ten years Britons and UK residents are required to complete a lengthy census form. Issued by the Government, it takes a lot to make the prospect of completing the form appealing.

A suggestion has been made that Google’s vast stores of data could soon help replace the laborious task of manually filing a compulsory questionnaire.

Internet search engines could be used as a source of cheap information on citizen’s lives, interests and movements, according to a government paper.

It could spell the end of the national census, which was first conducted in 1801 and has been carried out every ten years since, apart from during the Second World War.

It aims to cover every home in the country but the last census – the 52-page bulky document in 2011 – missed out three-and-a-half million people. It cost almost half a billion pounds, a price the Treasury considers far too high. But the possibility of abolishing it in favour of information taken in part from controversial internet multinationals risks deep rows over privacy and David Cameron’s ostensibly close links with Google executives.

The company is suffering major damage to its reputation following is slowness to curb inappropriate content and its failure to pay more than minimal taxes in Britain.

There also remain questions over its close links to Mr Cameron, some of his aides, and other ministers (including Labour MPs).

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has been working out ways of replacing the census with ‘administrative data’ from NHS, tax and benefit records, the electoral register, school and university rolls and other public sources.

But officials are also eager to use information from the private sector. ONS documents have canvassed the idea of tapping into companies with databases each covering more than ten million people.

Firms mentioned include Tesco, the E.ON energy supplier, Thames Water, and Nationwide. The idea of using Google and other search engines to replace the census was raised in a document produced by the Government Statistical Service. Its objective is to look ‘Beyond 2011’, the Whitehall programme for finding an alternative to the traditional census.

Part of the document’s remit is to look at ‘alternative data sources’ which include sources like internet searches or transaction data and information collected and held by commercial organisations.

One example of how this could work is through Google Trends, a publicly-available website which shows the most popular searches broken down by subject and location.

It could be used to find data on migration by, for example, checking the number of searches for jobs in Britain made in Romania.

Google insists it would never sell third party information.

Standard