Energy prices and markets

On Monday we will be asked in Parliament to approve a comprehensive set of powers for government to set maximum consumer prices for energy, to send large subsidies to energy suppliers who have to sell below cost and to remove surplus revenues from producers of electricity selling well above cost.

Of course we need to look after people who cannot afford their energy bills and need to offset some of the big hit to consumers generally. The energy price rise is like a massive tax rise.

We also need to be careful not to stop companies investing in new capacity or deter big users of power from seeking to improve their energy efficiency and reduce their use. We also need to keep the cost to taxpayers down where possible.

I would be interested in your thoughts on if there could be a cheaper and less all commanding scheme that would work?

 

228 Comments

  1. Mark B
    October 16, 2022

    Good morning.

    What this policy says to me, is failure ! Had those in governments’ years past had planned for the future we would be not only benefitting from the increased energy supply, but prices and investment as well.

    I am not too happy with the arrangement of price controls. We are going to have to pay for the increased costs no matter what, just further down the line due to borrowing and at an increased cost to boot. The energy companies get to stay in the game and maintain their profits as additional costs are absorbed by the tax payer via government borrowing / subsidy. The markets get to make a profit as they can artificially keep prices high knowing that the government will foot the bill regardless. All in all, a complete mess.

    What concerns me long term is, what if energy remains high for much, much longer than is anticipated. Will the government keep on subsidising this mess ?

    It would have been cheaper to just to build the Nuclear Reactors in the first place using tried and tested technology.

    1. Mike Stallard
      October 16, 2022

      “It would have been cheaper to just to build the Nuclear Reactors in the first place using tried and tested technology.” We led the world in this once. Now?

      1. turboterrier
        October 16, 2022

        Mike Stallard
        Bang on the money Mike.

        1. Leslie Singleton
          October 16, 2022

          Dear Mike–I thought that the idea was that the reactors based on those in our nuclear submarines could be used (no doubt that they are up and running, right?) with very little modification–pretty much straight away.

        2. Hope
          October 16, 2022

          JR, all too suspicious for my liking. Truss has sacked her chancellor for enacting her policy on which she was elected!!

          What company would trust your party and govt to invest vast sums of money!! Corporation tax, U-Turn after U- turn on fracking! Get real we have a remainer plot in Force. Hunt like all remainers do not want any benefits from Brexit. All remainers in your party sought to overthrow the democratic will of the nation, especially May. Hunt’s policy is no better than Labour! He wants more taxes!! How is this beneficial to the country or people?

          No one wanted Hunt he lost the first round to get elected as PM by your party, yet within 40 days is defacto to the PM!

          What are you and the leavers going to do now the remainers are in charge of the govt. with all the help from the civil service?

          Suggest you get your head out of the woods and smell the coffee.

          1. a-tracy
            October 16, 2022

            Hope, Sunak was supposed to be a leaver, he trotted along to the G7 meeting, Peter Parsons has reminded us, and they agreed a floor for global taxation of 15%, they are all in lockstep to have over 25% corporation tax which I suspect Sunak also agreed to do. That is why he couldn’t offer to reduce it as he knew what he’d agreed – with what – a handshake? Thats why they want him back he does as he’s told.

      2. Mark B
        October 16, 2022

        Yep ! We created fast breeder reactors and the like. World leaders.

        1. Hope
          October 16, 2022

          ATracey,

          Sunak put personal ambition above national interest. He listened to his vanity and it overtook his ability or personal qualities people like to see in others. He was a meek very quiet leaver. Hence why he was primed to go.

          UK now in the same position as Italy and Greece with an installed EU govt that will not at any cost show any benefit for leaving. Gutless Truss needs to go she has no credibility professionally or as a person. Bailey says he and Hunt are of similar minds! That should worry everyone who believes in democracy or our country.

          No country or body will not take advantage of U-Turning back stabbing friends Truss! She has made our country vulnerable and weak. Can you imagine Hunt wanting changes to N.Ireland protocol, not wanting to give EU tens of billions, happy for ECJ and ECHR, happy to give up fishing waters, happy for mass immigration to destroy our culture and way of life. Hunt signals the end of the UK.

          Hunt will deliver for Starmer on remaining in EU.

          Why was the chancellor post not given to Braverman or an existing cabinet leaver minister?

          1. Fedupsoutherner
            October 16, 2022

            Excellent post Hope. Much truth in what you say.

          2. a-tracy
            October 16, 2022

            Hope, perhaps you can tell me, NBilly on here told me that we weren’t saving any money after leaving so I looked up the accounts there were two payments to the EU since we finished the bulk of our pre-existing commitments from 2016-2020. In 2021 we paid nearly 50 billion euros to the EU, do you know what this was for? Because that looks to me like we are still in whilst being out of the single market and customs union.
            The newspapers say we owe £39bn but that was over a long period of time up to 2065 for pension obligations etc.
            The membership fee dropped from £14bn to £9bn to £5bn this year so it isn’t that.

      3. Ian Wragg
        October 16, 2022

        No chance Mike. The purpose of net zero is to umpoverish us.
        Being self sufficient in energy is against EU policy. Surely you can see the direction of travel with the dripping wet Hunt as chancellor, tax to prosperity is the tories mantra, never mind that it has failed throughout history.

      4. Lifelogic
        October 16, 2022

        Indeed abandon the insanity of net zero and continue to use fossil fuels (we have plenty for 200+ years). Use the vast sums saved to develop better nuclear and then practical fusion. We should be able to have the latter well within 30-50 years.

        CO2 is not causing any climate emergency anyway and world cooperation is never going to happen either – so get real please.

    2. Dave Andrews
      October 16, 2022

      Much cheaper to keep the coal fired power stations going.
      Nuclear power has always been extremely expensive.

      1. anon
        October 16, 2022

        All cabinet & Gov need to recognise they have FAILED on purpose over decades.
        Stop actively destroying our own capacity to be self sufficient.
        Remove & Replace Net Zero and zealots. Ban private Jet travel.

        a) set an average ration , subsidize that. b) anything over the ration no subsidy. c) higher than average use should be taxed more. d) ensure the rich decision makers are not allowed to just run generators on private estates to circumvent the above. e) max return on capital employed and or max GP margin allowed on the extra unit sales.

        Remove VAT on gas/coal electricity on average use.
        Generate using domestic reserves and capacity for self sufficiency.

        Allow competition rather than cartels or nationalize them and build for UK self sufficiency in the UK using only UK tech and only UK companies.

        Consider banning the export of power not deemed surplus , at times of stress twice the average price. Especially to countries who decide to close perfectly functional nuclear or other plant. ( That means we should expect same)

        Short term- 0-60 months.
        Keep coal fired stations (sitting on coal mines) mothballed for winter and for periods when needed as forecast by conditions, demand/supply weather. Ditto gas with greater storage!! ie 3 months demand e.g. winter we may not have needed all the old plant as insurance.

        Increase hydro power , run of river, closed loop pump capacity combined maybe with reservoirs?

        Much cheaper to allow the renewable to scale massively but now with no subsidies except may a low optional CFD and a requirement for open book accounting and a maximum Return on Capital Employed with any offshore swaps deals taxed at source at corp tax rates. There must be a requirement for non-curtailment and energy storage via energy storage, hydro , liquid air and or by production of intermediate goods.

        It might be better to nationalize the storage infrastructure of hydro and liquid air etc . Stop HS2 and Overseas Aid fund this and we solve a world problem. No expensive duff nuclear technology. Get RR cracking as well.

        A peaceful Manhattan project.

      2. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        but reliable and no other country can interfere.

    3. Ian B
      October 16, 2022

      @Mark B + 1, it would have been cheaper just to build Nuclear Reactors than subsidies foreign companies to supply the UK with our energy needs. The UK is moving further and further away from security and sustainability. In reality the taxpayer is being forced and punished by Government and having to pay twice for less.

    4. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      Mark B : “It would have been cheaper to just to build the Nuclear Reactors in the first place using tried and tested technology.”

      Absolutely correct, as nuclear is the only affordable, low carbon, reliable technology we have. But this is not the Net Zero Strategy’s plan.

      The National Grid’s “Leading The Way” (LTW) Future Energy Scenario for 2050 shows just 5% being nuclear power with a declared aim for other scenarios, if “customer transformation” is not proving to be feasible, for nuclear to be used only as a last resort.

      The 2050 LTW plan is for 64% of power to be generated by renewables with no long-term back up.

    5. Peter
      October 16, 2022

      Allegedly many Tory MPs have already accepted that defeat is inevitable in the next general election. They are now interested in damage limitation on the number of lost seats.

      Maybe others see it as a last chance to try to push through measures that suit them?

      Obliteration would be painful but it may help in the long term to clear the decks. A new party may emerge that listens to those who want genuine conservative policies.

      Otherwise, there will be no difference at all between whichever of the existing parties is in office.

      1. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        damage limitation – – it will be wipeout.
        I need to check odds with a bookie – – Labour to win 100 seat majority.
        Libs <10 seats.
        Greens <4 seats
        a treble?

      2. John Hatfield
        October 16, 2022

        “A new party may emerge that listens to those who want genuine conservative policies.”
        Peter, that party already exists. It’s called Reform UK.

        1. glen cullen
          October 16, 2022

          +1 gets my vote

        2. Peter
          October 16, 2022

          JH,
          I mean a new party capable of attracting support. Reform UK does not seem to be able to do that. Richard Tice does not have Nigel Farage’s ability as a speaker. Farage himself has put a lot of effort in, gained millions of votes – but only won a small number of seats.

    6. Timaction
      October 16, 2022

      How about getting rid of the Net Zero policy, repeal the climate change Act/Religion, get fracking, oil, gas extraction from the north sea and stop subsidising windmills and solar panels through our increased standing charges? Managed coal extraction and nuclear should also be in the mix until we have proven technology to get to have environmentally friendly power generation. Importing coal from Russia, woodchips from America and gas from Qatar and elsewhere is plainly……. madness. The legacies have had no power generation plan for a generation in their quest to reduce our carbon footprint whilst bankrupting the nation and exporting our manufacturing base to the East and elsewhere. Then importing those goods back from high producing CO2 nations claiming a reduction here. It’s the same atmosphere stupid. The green mass immigration Tory’s, a pretendy conservative party have a lot to answer for.
      How’s that growth, tax reduction plan going?
      It’s time for real change in our election process and more choice is needed to remove the idiots from Westminster.

      1. Mark
        October 16, 2022

        The new Swedish government has announced new policies that include
        No subsidy for new wind, which must bear cost of intermittency
        Expedite nuclear power
        No new interconnectors until neighbouring markets (German Energiewende in particular) sort themselves out and produce power at competitive prices rather than bidding up Swedish prices for exports.

    7. Stred
      October 16, 2022

      This energy policy is not accidental. It’s designed deliberate and will not be stopped until it is exposed and the general population understand what has been going on. The disinvestment in oil and gas and closing of coal has been globalist policy for years. It was tightened over the past 2 years with all finance ministers agreeing to ESG rules. The Head of Rolls Royce has said that he wishes he had not signed up because the regulations are a pain. The banks and all corporations are already operating it and increased fossil fuel prices are planned. They are not going to reverse the plan because it’s turned out be a disaster for small businesses and the plebs. Three quarters of MPs are on board with the plan or are too thick to realise what is going on.

    8. Bert Young
      October 16, 2022

      Energy companies have and continue to make substantial profits so imposing restraints on them now by keeping energy prices lower is no bad thing .
      Monday is the day for Conservative MPs to get their act together and decide on new leadership and all that it takes to re-establish stability and confidence .
      Regards , Bert Young .

  2. Lifelogic
    October 16, 2022

    Well you should of course maintain market prices so that the market can match supply and demand and ditch the mad net zero lunacy. Then give tax cuts and be benefit help to the few who cannot afford these increases. Far cheaper and far more efficient. Many people may choose to use the extra money in other ways rather than spend it on heating. Perhaps heating one room only and using the rest for other things. Price controls never work be it for rents, energy, food or anything else. Nor does controlling CO2 control the climate. Politicians are deluded morons in the main.

    The foolish Wilson and disastrous Heath tried it:- A 90-day freeze of pay and prices (as well as rents and dividends) introduced 1972 under the Counter-Inflation (Temporary Provisions) Act 1972. This was replaced by a Price and Pay Code, which strictly limited increases, supervised by a new Price Commission and a Pay Board. The Pay Board was abolished in July 1974 by Harold Wilson, but the Price Commission continued. The scope of its powers were amended by the Price Commission Act 1977 and the Price Commission (Amendment) Act 1979.

    Controls on prices were abolished soon after the Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher won the 1979 general election, and the Counter-Inflation Act 1973 was repealed by the Competition Act 1980. A 90-day freeze of pay and prices (as well as rents and dividends) was introduced on 6 November 1972 under the Counter-Inflation (Temporary Provisions) Act 1972. This was replaced by a Price and Pay Code, which strictly limited increases, supervised by a new Price Commission and a Pay Board.

    The Conservatives were unable to keep power after the inconclusive February 1974 UK general election, and the Pay Board was abolished in July 1974 by the minority Labour government led by Harold Wilson, but the Price Commission continued. The scope of its powers were amended by the Price Commission Act 1977 and the Price Commission (Amendment) Act 1979.

    Controls on prices were abolished soon after the Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher won the 1979 general election, and the Counter-Inflation Act 1973 was repealed by the Competition Act 1980. We have (in effect) effect price controls at NHS (free at the point of rationing) which gives us 7 million on the waiting list. Actually this is really over 10 million if you include those on the waiting lists for the waiting list.

    1. Lifelogic
      October 16, 2022

      So deluded and drunk on feeling of power are so many senior politicians, that they actually believe they can defy the laws of economic and even (with the net zero religion) the laws of physics & energy engineering & transport systems and even control the World climate.

      So Kwasi and Truss inherited a huge mess made by the vast tax increases, waste, currency debasements and idiotic policies of Sunak, Hammond, Osborne and Darling, Brown, Major before them. Then Kwasi/Truss get the blame for finally trying to take a small step in the right direction. Their mistake was not to cull the vast government waste at the same time. HS2, net zero, the duff degrees, about 50% of the state sector “workers”, the vast over regulation of everything…

      Once against the triumph of bonkers religions over science, logic & reality.

      1. Nigl
        October 16, 2022

        Agree totally and with Mark B. This is a panic measure and another u turn.

        What’s the point of feeding back. This government has broken its manifesto and many subsequent promises, as far as I can see ignored comments from this blog, many of which would have found favour with membership that voted for Truss who, PM in name only, has blithely ditched everything she stood for no more than a month ago. Indeed her new chancellor isn’t a conservative.

        It’s has confirmed what we know that we are controlled by a Remain alliance of the unelected, liberal elites and Civil Servants with jelly spined Ministers and MPs. Sir J R’s mantra, civil servants advise, ministers decide. How silly that looks?

        The Tory party is prostituting itself to any bidder that will help keep its grubby hands in power.

        1. NBill Brown
          October 16, 2022

          Sir JR

          Please help me with these messages
          I recommend Liz Truss
          I blame the BoE for the raised interest rates
          The mini budget has nothing to do with the uncertainty in the markets
          We don’t need input from OBR at this stage

          Are these your messages in the past three weeks?

          1. Lifelogic
            October 16, 2022

            JR makes sensible points but Truss clearly had no chance at all as too many Tory MPs were determined to knife her from day one. Gove it seems leading the charge. The market problems were caused far more by 12 years of the serial, socialist, green crap incompetence of Osborne, Hammond and tax to death, waste and currency debase Rishi Sunak in particular. They would not it seems allow any sensible cuts in the endless government waste. So the serial, socialist, green crap incompetence now continues under Hunt. He is now blaming his proposes huge tax rises on Kwasi & not this idiotic refusal to cut out some of the vast government waste.

        2. Jim Whitehead
          October 16, 2022

          Nigl, +1.

          1. NBill Brown
            October 16, 2022

            Lifelogic,
            Truss did it all herself by going out on her own without consulting anybody as she should have done

        3. Sharon
          October 16, 2022

          Nigl

          “ It’s has confirmed what we know that we are controlled by a Remain alliance of the unelected, liberal elites and Civil Servants with jelly spined Ministers and MPs. Sir J R’s mantra, civil servants advise, ministers decide. How silly that looks?”

          Certainly looks this way… a coup!

      2. Cuibono
        October 16, 2022

        +many
        Well of course, they purposely removed religion from the equation and as we all know “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him”.…(Voltaire)
        So the powers that be have invented a mad religion of …( death really) …in their own image.

      3. Donna
        October 16, 2022

        + 1

      4. Lynn Atkinson
        October 16, 2022

        Exactly! Decades in the making – but then we did not need to sanction our energy supplier! That was suicide.

      5. Jim Whitehead
        October 16, 2022

        LL, +1, (multiply that infinitely, please, in order to reflect the utter disgust with the uselessness of the cited politicians and the nameless sheep who cast their votes for the deluded follies). Sweet reason is as futile as the flowers of the sixties in confronting the foolishness of the current fashionable mantras and the BBC. Reason must prevail but acceptance of the BBC in control of the narrative ensures continuing decline and demise of what we once thought was the nature of our country.

      6. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        and thats the Truth !

      7. Lifelogic
        October 16, 2022

        BMW move electric vehicle production to China and British Volt struggling to raise finance. Energy intensive industries (all of them) in the UK are done for unless we scrap net zero, cut energy taxes and deregulate hugely. Get fracking, drilling and mining and better nuclear now. The net zero religion is killing the UK economy.

        1. Shirley M
          October 16, 2022

          Exactly, LL. They push business and industry to move abroad for cheaper energy, taking jobs with them, and who pays the taxes then?????

        2. Mark
          October 16, 2022

          We’re certainly not going to be the Detroit of EVs. I fear that Mr Rees Mogg is probably a little out of his depth in understanding just how entrenched is Business Eradication and Industrial Suppression. Still, I suppose it may mean that when push comes to shove no-one will finance projects for green hydrogen etc. I gather some of the banks are getting nervous about the prospects for these ideas, since the subsidies required are completely unaffordable.

    2. Mike Wilson
      October 16, 2022

      Then give tax cuts and be benefit help to the few who cannot afford these increases

      The FEW who cannot afford the increases. The FEW!?

      You clearly have no idea how many people live from hand to mouth with no savings and with life a constant struggle. Millions and millions of them. And, even people who can afford an extra £1500 on their gas and electricity, that’s £1500 they aren’t spending on things that create demand and jobs etc.

    3. BOF
      October 16, 2022

      Quite right LL. Price controls do not work. Wasn’t it Dioclatian who tried it, and failed? He was probably not the only one. Our politicians, however, know better despite the evidence of history.

      1. Lifelogic
        October 16, 2022

        Was it? A bit before my time must look it up!

    4. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      LL :

      I agree completely with your first paragraph. But this will not be the selected plan.

      The Net Zero Strategy’s plan is to make energy much more expensive.

      Hence the deliberate restriction on fossil fuel production to drive up prices and also to give the totally false impression that renewable energy is cheaper.

      The reason for high energy prices is not to reduce energy usage in order to reduce CO2 emissions but to destroy the economies of the West through de-industrialisation, poverty and restrictive life-style changes.

      The evidence is clear :

      – There is no plan to use nuclear energy, the only technology that can produce affordable, reliable, low carbon energy. It is also the safest fuel by TWhrs/death. The NG ESO LTW FES 2050 plan is for just 5% nuclear energy despite the IEA supporting nuclear energy to transition from fossil fuels.

      – The fifth column communist climate activists have no issue with China and India burning between them 5.6 billion tons of coal each year.

      – There is simply no climate emergency/crisis. CO2 and temperature are at their lowest levels for 500 million years since the start of the Cambrian explosion. The Antarctic Vostok Ice Core Data shows that CO2 follows temperature and average global temperature is only increasing at 0.13 degrees C per decade. CO2 levels dropped 9 times over the last 800,000 years (including during the last ice age 11,000 years ago) to just 180 ppm only 30 ppm above the 150 ppm minimum that plants need to survive. In fact we need more CO2 in the atmosphere, not less, to increase plant growth and food production.

      1. Sharon
        October 16, 2022

        Original Richard

        From my research, you are correct! There is no climate emergency.

        I recently heard two of the Stop oil protesters on GB News and both of them sounded the same. They’ve been versed (or brainwashed) in what to say and think, how to ask silly questions in their reply and when to chuckle mockingly. When asked any other question on their pre-rehearsed dozen or so responses; it was clear they didn’t have a clue. Useful idiots for the destruction of the country.

  3. Mike Stallard
    October 16, 2022

    Let us have some common sense. We live in a very richly endowed little island. We are sitting on a lot of gas and coal. We have a history of high educational values and some excellent teachers. Our communications systems are modern and excellent and we can move stuff around very well too.
    Now the whole lot is junked. Shouty people yell about their hopeless future as the earth warms up (no real evidence is ever provided, although to see the t.v. you might think so). Shouty people yell about things they know nothing about (fracking, coal, carbon emissions). Shouty people yell about extinction and our children’s hopeless angry future in a Godless world.
    Maybe we ought to come to our senses?
    Or perhaps not…

    1. Lifelogic
      October 16, 2022

      Indeed.

      Daniel Hannan today. “If Conservative MPs can’t even cut taxes, they might as well hand over power to Keir Starmer
      Liz Truss’s growth plan was undone by Tory MPs’ refusal to accept any serious reductions in spending.”

      Yet there is so much waste that could so easily be sensibly cut. HS2, the circa half of the government that does net harm, the duff degrees, net zero, the road blocking programme, the grants for renewables and EVs the huge waste in the NHS, the incompetent defence procurement…

      1. glen cullen
        October 16, 2022

        The brainwashing exercise is complete, its now evil to even consider a ‘tax-cut’

      2. BOF
        October 16, 2022

        +1 LL

      3. Timaction
        October 16, 2022

        Indeed. I’ve seen first hand how Councils, the Home Office, the Police, the MOD, Fire Service etc etc are all employing far too many people doing effectively NOTHING. They all adopt the saying that “Work expands to fill the time allotted”! I spent and hour on the phone a couple of weeks ago trying to talk to someone about our exorbitant Council tax. No answer. I had to drive into the Council offices in person to get that answer. As a cynic I suspect they’re all working from home, walking the dog, going to the gym, shopping etc. Just like a near neighbour has been doing this for the last years (since covid) whilst notionally employed by the MOD.
        If the Government was serious about cutting costs then start by only providing what they MUST do. Anything else should be done by us. I’m told that there are 5 million on benefits, a substantial number doing 16 hours to gain all those encompassing benefits. 300,000 families where three generations have NEVER worked. HS2 still going ahead whilst no one uses the trains anymore. Obscene amounts in foreign aid to Countries with Space programmes and much larger militaries. Stop mass legal and illegal immigration and supported family. How can students have dependent relatives? Only in a Tory administration! That’s why we can’t get a Doctors appointment and Dental Services no longer exist. The list of failures goes on and on. It’s time for real change and a proper conservative, right of centre Government.

        1. Richard II
          October 16, 2022

          Mature students can have dependent relatives, Timaction. But you’re surely right on all the rest, especially the WFH scandal.

    2. Cuibono
      October 16, 2022

      +1
      Shouty people yell the government’s message.
      Shouty people support the government agenda ( but think they are rebels).
      They are allowed to spread fear and hatred, they steal and disrupt and destroy.
      If that were not the case the shouty people would be in prison.
      The government has no problem dealing with true opposition.
      For a start we are all legally prevented from saying much that needs to be said!

    3. Mark B
      October 16, 2022

      There is little point in having vast amounts of coal, gas and oil if the government outlaws it (witness the USA).

      There is no point in having good communications if there is nothing to power it or, the cost of running it makes it prohibitively expensive (witness electric cars).

      There is no point in having high educational standards when those with said high education see their futures elsewhere because a) we cannot keep the lights on & b) we tax people to the eyeballs.

      I can see it. Others can see it. Sadly only one person in government could see it but, he’s gone !

  4. Fedupsoutherner
    October 16, 2022

    I still hear or see nothing being done regarding fracking or opening up new wells. Is anything actually going to happen on this score? Mark B makes some very good points in that all this money will have to be paid back and what happens next year? This whole mess is due to the failure of governments themselves virtue signalling and it’s still going on. We desperately need more of our own supplies before next winter. Labour will carpet England with useless wind and if they neglect back up which will have to match the output we will find ourselves without energy. It will cost billions and so we will be paying for two systems. How many times do they need to be told that wind power just cannot work? Not everyone needs to have their income supported to pay their energy bills. Some are so wealthy they won’t even need to cut down but just like with furlough money will be thrown around like confetti and worry about it later. Labour will try to pick up the pieces but on past performance it will be a disaster. We have nothing to thank this self serving government for and I hope to God people consider voting for a new party showing courage like they are in Europe. Reform for me.

    1. Lifelogic
      October 16, 2022

      Alas a vote for Reform will give us Labour/SNP/Libdim given the voting system that pertains. Who (in England especially) wants Starmer/Strurgeon with even more net zero, rent controls, vast tax increases, wealth taxes and confiscation and rule largely by the state sector unions? It would be even more of a disaster than Cameron, May, Boris have been.

      1. Wanderer
        October 16, 2022

        Perhaps we need a total disaster in order to “Reform”.

        It is risky, though. Disasters can last a long time, you only have to look at Venezuela. It may be a risk we have to take. The ship is sinking with no rescue on the way. Do we get it over with, or prolong the agony?

      2. Peter Wood
        October 16, 2022

        Do you recall the effect Mr Farage had on the Tories after the EU elections? Only when threatened with defeat at the poles will the Party react. That’s why we need to make Reform a credible force to make Tory candidates lose seats.

        1. Donna
          October 16, 2022

          Absolutely. What we really need is for Reform UK and the Reclaim Party to unite. That really would scare the bejesus out of the Uni-Party.

          1. Sharon
            October 16, 2022

            There’s also The Heritage Party, David Kurton, UKIP, Neil Hamilton and Gina Millers , Fair (and something or other) party.

            Reform UK already have 300 potential candidates and are looking for a further 300. If people took a chance, there’s plenty of fresh blood prepared to give it a go in government.

        2. R.Grange
          October 16, 2022

          That’s exactly the right strategy, Peter W. Even before then, UKIP started to threaten the Tory voter base, so we got a referendum. The same thing needs to happen again so we get a referendum on the insane Net Zero energy armageddon that Truss and her hapless ministers are still steering us towards. Richard Tice and Reform UK have proposed a referendum: https://votepowernotpoverty.uk
          I would be interested to know if our good host or any commenters on this site would be against his proposal.

      3. Shirley M
        October 16, 2022

        LL: If we had Labour I doubt you would notice the difference, except maybe immigration would actually go down? I think even Labour are embarrassed sat the numbers being allowed in.

        Swings and roundabouts. Both are unfit to govern. Vote Reform and give LibLabCon a bloody nose. It may (just) shake them out of their betrayal and permanent ruination of the UK.

        1. Lifelogic
          October 16, 2022

          Any rent controls alone would be a disaster any SNP power likewise plus they would be even more full of green crap, over regulation and ever more taxes than the Tories.

      4. Shirley M
        October 16, 2022

        LL: I can’t understand why an intelligent person would keep voting for the ‘same old’ unless they want the ‘same old’. The CONS have lied and deceived at every opportunity yet you would continue voting for someone who abuses your vote so badly, and has brought the UK into ruin? Is voting for the ‘least worst’ going to change anything? No. You just acknowledge that you are satisfied with incompetence, just so long as they are not even more incompetent than Labour, but even that belief is now coming into question!

        We need change, and voting for same old will continue to give us same old. Be brave, give the main parties a good kicking and send the message we do no appreciate their abuse of us and our country! UKIP didn’t win seats (one, maybe), but they forced the biggest political change in my lifetime. We can do it again. We want DEMOCRACY to be restored!

        1. Magelec
          October 16, 2022

          +1

        2. Mark B
          October 16, 2022

          Fear of the unknown. Fear of something worse (witness LL and his Lab/SNP coalition nonsense),

      5. Christine
        October 16, 2022

        Stop perpetuating this myth. There are as many disillusioned Labour voters as there are Conservative voters. We just have to rally the voters so that voter apathy doesn’t allow the status quo to continue. It’s time for all people who love this country to start supporting the Reform party. Get out on the streets, deliver leaflets, donate funds, and attend rallies. It’s the grassroots that make any party successful.

        1. glen cullen
          October 16, 2022

          +1

      6. Duyfken
        October 16, 2022

        I have been caught too many times with that argument Ll, and enough is enough. I will not vote for a Party which does not do as it says it will, or which follows policies I do not want. Anyway it seems too late to expect a Tory success at the next GE. Like “Fus”, my vote can only be for Reform and may many decide likewise.

      7. glen cullen
        October 16, 2022

        That’s a cowards approach ….one should always vote for whom you believe and not to stop another party winning, otherwise nothing will ever change – From little acorns

      8. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        So how do we stop the endless shambles? Cameron – May – Johnson – Truss – Hunt? – who next to be ousted by another groupo of so-called Tory MPs?
        Three things are certain Death Taxes ‘Tory Division’
        The sooner the elements of power/influence behind the scenes are thrown out the better.
        I am not a Starmer fan but the message of Tory mis-governing cannot go on any more.
        A red line in the sand has be drawn — the blood of a shambolic Party.
        Sir John for God’s sake throw the towel in with this rabble, your country needs you – the Tories don’t.

        1. a-tracy
          October 16, 2022

          MT you are asking him to give up too much, he would lose his place in the Lords for a start, look how these despicable politicians have ignored Anne Widdecombe after years and years of faithful service.

          Reply I am not seeking a place in the Lords. I am trying to persuade people who think with the consensus to change their approach

          1. glen cullen
            October 16, 2022

            I just wonder if SirJ resigned the party whip and became the first Reform Party MP …how many would follow

          2. a-tracy
            October 16, 2022

            Well perhaps thats where it is going wrong John, you may not be seeking a place in the Lords but they certainly are, so they say one thing to get elected then do something different like May and Hammond to thwart the wishes of those electing them.

          3. Sir Joe Soap
            October 16, 2022

            Reply to reply. The concensus here is Reform. You won’t change those thinking that being stuck in the mud is the place to be by sticking in the mud yourself.

      9. Fedupsoutherner
        October 16, 2022

        LL. Labour is inevitable unless a miracle happens. Somehow with what’s being proposed I don’t see a miracle happening.

        1. Hugh Thompson
          October 16, 2022

          I’m certainly of the same Mynd (and locality).

        2. Magelec
          October 16, 2022

          LL. In that case why not vote for a party that does expouse true conservative values?

      10. BOF
        October 16, 2022

        LL
        Sadly, I think the Con party has ensured a Labour government next time around. The culprits are simply too arrogant to understand what they have done!

      11. beresford
        October 16, 2022

        By that logic we’ll never break free of the Uniparty and its destruction of our nation in the name of globalism. What concerns me more is that if Reform did break through and get some seats they would likely be bribed to follow the same Establishment policies or blocked by the Blob.

        1. Sir Joe Soap
          October 16, 2022

          They’d need to develop poison pill controls to keep themselves honest

      12. Shirley M
        October 16, 2022

        They say that the first sign of madness is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result. Why keep voting for no change?

      13. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        even the Scots don’t want Sturgeon, yet the English would hand them Independence.

      14. Mark
        October 16, 2022

        Thete are many constituencies that do not seem to have the option of a proper Conservative candidate. To judge from the membership voting for party leader and the membership polling that preceded it, the party membership are aware that in too many cases they have been foist with candidates who are not Conservatives. If Constituency Associations are not allowed to rectify the situation then maybe there needs to be a clear out that losing seats can help provide. At the moment it appears that we are a long way from seeing a coherent Conservative party. It may be that replacement by a new insurgent party is the best way to resolve matters. Under FPTP dramatic changes are possible, especially when votes for the net zero establishment have to be split several ways.

    2. turboterrier
      October 16, 2022

      F U S
      Good post and you will not be alone on your last comment.
      Have you ever thought how much money could have been saved if none of this NZ crap was impacting on our lives?
      The stopping of fracking and coal mining and trying to be a world leader on STW hoping others would follow?

      1. Lifelogic
        October 16, 2022

        The cost of Net Zero both direct through subsided and indirect (in expensive energy and red tape deterring investments or pushing them overseas) is colossal. No sensible cost benefit analysis was done before the MPs nearly all voted for the climate change act or nodded through May’s moronic net zero.

    3. Roy Grainger
      October 16, 2022

      Fracking will not happen because even John says it must be subject to local resident approval which will, of course, not be given. When even John is part of the anti growth coalition on fracking you know there is absolutely no chance of it happening. Anyway, our new left-wing PM Hunt will not allow it either – just off topic but who exactly elected him to that role ? Not the MPs, or party members or the wider electorate. It’s a mystery.

    4. a-tracy
      October 16, 2022

      FuS we’ll Reform should be more sensible, instead of standing against good solid conservatives they should invest their time and effort in the seats of pretend conservatives. They know who they are.

  5. turboterrier
    October 16, 2022

    Both the government and devolved governments have been taken to the cleaners by the renewable power generating companies.
    They have been allowed site after site to be constructed in close proximity of others knowing that the transmission structure was never in place to get the power generated to the grid and that they stood to and do earn massive sums of the energy bill customers who ultimately pay for all the constraint payments and other subsidies. Which is fine for the company (mostly foreign ) and its shareholders. Using the price of gas to set electic prices is another nice little earner for the generators.
    Government has to look at the whole energy market process as at the moment it seems the tail is wagging the dog. Basically because the large majority of the members of both houses have not got a clue. Again they have been manipulated by external sources.
    They had been warned for years about the path they were taking but none listened to the very few in the house who had studied and investigated the situation. Then came NZ to compound the problem.

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      October 16, 2022

      Exactly right Turbo. I remember attending many meetings with directors of the grid and professors and energy experts…..you know.. those that actually work in the sector and governments were told not to go down this route. I even went to a UKIP meeting where Farage was saying renewables were an expensive folly. How right he was as he is on many things. Wind farms have been allowed to be erected very close to villages and are more obtrusive than a fracking well. We have a national emergency and with careful consideration fracking must be allowed to go on.

      1. glen cullen
        October 16, 2022

        +1

    2. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      tuboterrier : “Both the government and devolved governments have been taken to the cleaners by the renewable power generating companies.”

      Yes, many of the renewable power companies are doing rather well, and not only from the subsidies.

      Firstly there are those who are selling power at the current high prices by not taking up their much lower CfD contracts.

      Secondly, some are getting paid twice for the same electricity. If, for any reason, the grid cannot take the electricity then they are paid “constraint payments”. But this does not stop the generator selling the same electricity instead to an “off-grid” user.

      The Civil Service/Ofgem have royally shafted us over the renewable generators’ contracts.

    3. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      Probably the best thing would be if the government stopped looking at the energy market, because it tries to foist its own net zero overlay on top. It should ask the market to define what would be a sensible way to proceed to ensure competitively cheap reliable supply, while including flexibility to respond to changing markets and technology. When we have that benchmark we can look at what it would cost to change it.

      Instead we have the government trying to design the system without even verifying that the design works, and seeking to distort the market to try to support their Heath Robinson design.

  6. Philip P.
    October 16, 2022

    Helping to bring down global energy prices must be a part of the government’s strategy, so the question is what will achieve that. If we look back to times in the summer when they did come down, it was because gas storage had reached higher levels, and because the prospect of gas flows through Nordstream 1 looked better, following the completion of maintenance work. The sabotage of Nordstream has obviously knocked that off the table for the time being, but the key factors remain high energy flows via all available routes, including Turkstream, and high storage levels. Reducing global tensions thanks to the continued war in Ukraine remains the key, and our foreign policy needs to work towards that goal. Kiev must be told it will be given security guarantees by the West as long as it agrees to a negotiated settlement. Its recent military successes have put it in a strong position which may not last, but which will give it a strong hand for now. If we wish to see energy prices come down, this is the way to go about it.

    1. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      Philip P. “Reducing global tensions thanks to the continued war in Ukraine remains the key, and our foreign policy needs to work towards that goal.”

      Dream on.

      Firstly, Putin does not want to stop the war. Russia is making so much money from the high prices for its oil, gas and minerals that Russia will have cleared its national debt within the next 2 years.

      Biden does not to want to stop the war because he believes it will hurt Russia but more importantly because it is bringing Europe to its knees. He wants Europe, Germany in particular, to no longer be an economic threat to the US.

      Biden is pushing for Europe to transition as quickly as possible to useless, expensive and intermittent renewable energy.

      Who will have gained from the blowing up of the Nord Stream gas pipe lines?

      1. Philip P.
        October 17, 2022

        You make some good points, OR, but all wars end in peace, of a sort. All this country can do towards that end is to stop prolonging the war by supplying Ukraine with weapons, intel, and money we can’t afford. We should use this as a lever on Kiev to get the regime to negotiate while there is still a prospect of a viable Ukraine in the future. Some European country needs to push NATO on to a more sustainable course, and defend the interests of European countries’ economies. It won’t come from the EU, so I think we have to take a lead on this. Thinking out of the NATO box need not be just a dream IMO.

    2. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      The global supply picture for gas is certainly very important. The reality of Rusdian supply into Europe is that all pipeline routes have been cut back or halted progressively over the past year, while this year LNG supply has been much better than last year, when most of it went to China. China has been getting increased pipeline deliveries, and has been reselling its LNG to Europe at a large profit.

      The real supply problem is that global production outside Russia has been hobbled by lack of investment, at first rationally as a response to reduced demand in 2020, but increasingly because Western governments have been trying to prevent it, with bans on new licences, fracking, new LNG gasification projects, new pipelines. That is what really needs to change, since we must accept that Russia is now on its own quixotic and somewhat unpredictable path, and cannot be relied upon.

  7. formula57
    October 16, 2022

    On grounds of affordability, of course there should be ” a cheaper and less all commanding scheme”.

    Meanwhile, the Truss subsidy of £66 exceeds my normal billing, leaving me in Micawberesque bliss. If this is socialism, I am agreeably surprised.

    1. Mark B
      October 16, 2022

      It looks like, with careful prudence, that I too will covered by the energy subsidy. But that is not the point. The government needs to move away from providing subsidies in ALL areas because it is buggering up the market / economy.

    2. Mickey Taking
      October 16, 2022

      £66 doesn’t even keep our lights and tv on.
      Considering bringing indoors garden solar !!

  8. Bob Dixon
    October 16, 2022

    No matter which party governs the U.K. the debt that has been run up is not in their control.The institutions who bought this debt either buy more or realise it.
    So it is with owners of property. They took out a mortgage at very low interest rates.When the interest rate increases they may have to sell the property in a falling market.
    The lesson in life is if you borrow monies you lose control of your future.

    1. Nigl
      October 16, 2022

      Yes. Let’s not forget for years our host has been sanguine about our debt with little/no comment about closing the current account deficit.

      Indeed no one has been honest about the problem with no courage to face up to it and as usual it is the markets forcing them to take action.

      It’s called Trading Insolvently and in the private sector, Company Directors get banned for it. How I wish this could also happen with our government.

      1. formula57
        October 16, 2022

        @ Nigl – “our host has been sanguine about our debt” because that has been appropriate: a recent short essay titled “How Does Excessive Debt Hurt an Economy?” by the inestimable Michael Pettis on his China Financial markets blog explains. We could be in for trouble now though.

    2. Mark B
      October 16, 2022

      Agreed. But this in turn has an effect on all of us, whether we have been prudent or not.

    3. IanT
      October 16, 2022

      Not at all Bob, debt is a very useful tool but only if used wisely.

      Unfortunately, we have a younger gneration who are not well educated about personal finance or the way economies function. When average wage vs average house prices are so high (8 times, much more in some areas) it was fairly obvious that something would eventually break. People believed that prices could only go up, never down. They see a house as an investment, rather than as a home. They see others seemingly making large capital gains (via leveraged debt) not realising that large losses can result from excessive leverage too.

      Governments and Banks have colluded to offer cheap money without sufficent checks and balances. Builders have built thousands of little boxes (made out of ticky-tack) that are poorly built or insufficiently insulated. I feel very sorry for the young folk who have jumped onto this housing ponsi merry-go round and will now probably find themselves in negative equity. If they can keep up their mortgages, all be fine one day and they will have a home. If they cannot, then they will be badly burnt. Ms Truss will get all the blame of course. Keir is already doing that but the foundations of this disaster have been long in the making.

  9. Sea_Warrior
    October 16, 2022

    ‘… remove surplus revenues from producers of electricity selling well above cost.’ If these are the Windy Millers, who have received government subsidies, and are now exploiting consumers, I am happy for them to be hit with price controls. But leave oil & gas producers well alone; they take considerable risks and are already being hammered.

    1. Mark B
      October 16, 2022

      Very much agreed.

      I hear that Germany is hitting renewable suppliers with a windfall tax. Citation needed.

      1. hefner
        October 18, 2022

        04/09/2022 reuters.com ‘Germany to use windfall tax income to reduce energy prices for end customers’.

    2. IanT
      October 16, 2022

      Yes, I agree SW
      Unfortunately, the moment I think any policies might make good sense – that seems to be the kiss of death for them. Listening to another “wind is the cheapest energy” proponent the other day and was thinking, even if that were true, it doesn’t make one iota of difference to what I’m actually paying for my energy, so why should I care?
      I do like the idea of ‘Windy Millers’ btw.

    3. Berkshire Alan
      October 16, 2022

      Sea -Warrior

      Stop paying the windy millers to turn off would be a help.
      Why on earth are we paying the wind machines to stop working, given they get paid subsidies to also produce electricity, when at the same time we are paying other back up systems to be on line, “just in case”
      I know we get production of a lot of hot air in Parliament, but wind is not a base line provider of energy and never will be, it’s too variable.

      1. Shirley M
        October 16, 2022

        +1 – whoever agreed that contract needs sacking and public humiliation in the stocks, or was it to their (and their influential pals) personal benefit?

      2. Stred
        October 16, 2022

        Andrew Montford has found out that the wind companies in N.Scotland are taking constraint subsidies and selling excess electricity to grid stabilising subsidy takers. I.e. Being paid twice and also taking peak gas prices instead of the agreed subsidy price.

    4. Fedupsoutherner
      October 16, 2022

      In total agreement SW. I never understood why they placed a carbon tax on oil and gas in the first place. Why tax something we depend on for our lives to be normal?

  10. Nottingham Lad Himself
    October 16, 2022

    Your ideology has handed an entire market in an absolute essential to a de facto cartel.

    It’s a capitalist’s dream come true.

    The electorate seem finally to have rumbled you however, going by the polls.

    1. a-tracy
      October 16, 2022

      The polls say one thing NLH yet the elections last week said another, Labour vote well down in two elections on Thursday, rather odd don’t you think?

    2. IanT
      October 16, 2022

      You mean Sir John’s ideology NLH? Not sure why you would think that, as I’ve not seen too many of Sir J’s ideas actually implemented. However, you should be very happy at the moment
      It looks very likely that Keir Starmer will be in charge before very long and then we will see how markets like his “ideology” of tax and spend. I’m pretty sure that the people won’t be very pleased. Certainly not once they realise that he has no more idea of how to run the country than most of the other lunatics in Westminster at the moment. So be careful what you wish for, as you are probably going to get it!

      1. Fedupsoutherner
        October 16, 2022

        IanT. Yes agree. There will be more spending on welfare and giving wild pay rises to public sector workers who have big unions. We will be more in debt than ever. I will not vote for such incompetence whether it be Cons, Lab or Libs.

      2. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        Starmer? Cabinet with Abbott, Rayner, Dodds, Lammy, Thorniberry, Cooper, Reeves, Lynch, Graham, Gary Smith, Ward, Cat Smith.
        The cast for a horror movie.

    3. glen cullen
      October 16, 2022

      The Elon Musk theory of business & conning governments out of subsidy

  11. MPC
    October 16, 2022

    You ask for our thoughts for a less all commanding scheme and in the very short term the targeting of support for the least well off is clearly preferable. But the real problem is strategy, or lack of it – Net Zero is the only ‘strategy’ in place. Good practice in commerce and government should be as practised by some of us in our work, namely ‘strategy first, projects later’ or in the current political circumstances ‘strategy first, tactical fiscal, monetary (and energy related) decisions to follow’. Truss and Kwarteng ignored all that with their simplistic mini budget, saying ‘oh don’t worry the rationale can wait until the end of November’ and then ‘ok end of October’. Now the pessimists are in control and your party in government has destroyed all prospect of a return to lower taxation and lower long term energy costs.

    1. IanT
      October 16, 2022

      All (unfortunately) true MPC

    2. Clough
      October 16, 2022

      Well put, MPC. The classic political short termism that this country has suffered from for so long has now gone into overdrive. We now have a government that’s more concerned with whether the Prime Minister can stay in office at least till the end of the week, than with anything else.

      I know it’s cruel, but let’s compare Truss with Thatcher. That prime minister had a plan of where the country needed to go in the future and what sort of economy would allow it to prosper. You might not have agreed with it, but you couldn’t deny that it was thought through over the longer term, consistent, and achievable. No part of that plan involved racking up huge debts that the country couldn’t afford. The utility privatisations led to healthy competition and technological improvement. (Thatcher avoided the more dubious and ridiculously expensive privatisation of the railways.)

      If there is any life left in the Conservative party, it will follow MT’s example of planning for the future in substance, not just in slogans like ‘growth’. If Truss and her advisers are capable of doing that, and can say how in future the country will earn its living without depending on state handouts, they might still have a chance.

  12. Bryan Harris
    October 16, 2022

    With Truss hemmed in on all sides by globalists, there is little chance we will see policies or even action to resolve the energy problems.

    It is heart breaking for those that still believe in Conservative values to see their party fall prey to corruption and external influence.

    When did it all start? I estimate HMG was compromised during Major’s time as PM, with subsequent PM’s also doing as they were told.

    Can Truss do anything to implement any of her plans? If I were one of the broken hearted I would certainly be looking to form a TRUE Conservative party.
    An interesting thought – if Truss did this could she take the PM title with her?

  13. Berkshire Alan
    October 16, 2022

    I certainly favour a free market, but the absolute necessities of life should never be in Private Companies hands (least of all Foreign owned Companies) thus Water, Heat, Light, Power should be managed by the State, then we know exactly who is responsible for the supply and cost, and can vote accordingly.
    Creative accounting, which the Government also practices to hide true debt, is now a method used by many to hide the true cost and supply of almost everything. This practice has grown and been fuelled by high and ever growing taxation, as more and more companies attempt to retain a sensible profit (rate of return) at almost any cost.
    The present system I am afraid is broken, we need to get back to basics with small but efficient government, and give up on the politics of envy, and the so called redistribution of wealth, and the micro management of peoples lives that will eventually mean we will all end up with nothing, simply because there is no incentive for anyone to work any more.

    1. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      I prefer being able to vote with my wallet. Where permitted, I can change who I vote for as often as I want. I don’t have to wait for an election that offers no real choice about how energy supply is managed. That is our real problem: the decisions are taken by inept government and quangos. Changing supplier has no influence on supply: the government mandates that all must buy from windmills. Changing government makes no difference either. They all impose the same system.

  14. DOM
    October 16, 2022

    Please, please make up your mind and let’s have some consistency. Net Zero or low energy prices? You can’t have both.

    The entire area of Marxist progressive faeces that politicians expect us to digest through IMPOSITION not CHOICE will eventually fall apart under the weight of its own contradictions but when it does the system will have destroyed what freedoms we have left anyway. People vote for this poison when they cross a ballot choice labelled Tory, Labour and SNP. Are people blind? Are they stupid? Do they have a death wish or are they addicted to the free-lunch politics of the main party who recognise that without the free-lunch BRIBE it all comes crashing down?

    Most on here now know the Tory party is a scam and a sham and exists only to employ those who enjoy remuneration from it. I have no problem with this but please be open about it rather than acting deceitfully and proclaiming they care about our nation when in fact they don’t.

    1. Berkshire Alan
      October 16, 2022

      Dom
      Afraid it’s not just the Conservatives It is all of the political Parties, and that is the real heart of the problem.
      For decades now the work shy and the feckless seem to have made gains from Government policies, those who have worked hard, and who have striven to do the right thing in attempting to pay their own way, and tried to be self sufficient, have been steadily fleeced by the huge and all encompassing tax system, by deliberate redistribution of wealth polices, and by the fiscal drag of tax allowances.
      The Government needs to remember one big fact, we all work for ourselves and our families first, not for the Government to take and waste our money.
      Many now feel they have been taken for fools for too long, and have got fed up with all of them.
      Just look at the hundreds of thousands of illegals, who are now supping at the teat of the taxpayer for an example of how useless Government policy has been.
      We may be a nuclear power, but politicians do not even have the courage to turn around a rubber dinghy !
      Many talk a good game, promise the earth, but are utterly useless when it comes to action.
      The population are getting angry and absolutely with what is going on in Parliament John !

  15. Javelin
    October 16, 2022

    Are
    Remind people to use their timer delay on their appliances. It costs 80p an hour to run a washing machine or tumble dryer. A lot of people’s electric meter measures day and night usage. If you force (eg via a tax) energy companies to reduce night usage tariffs then you will also smooth out usage.

    1. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      Javelin,

      If our fifth column communists continue with Net Zero and expensive and intermittent renewables then different day and night usage charges will no longer exist. It will be more important to go to a weather site to see when the wind will be blowing.

      The National Grid, since everything will be electrified, will determine when you are allowed to run the dishwasher, the washing machine, take a shower, charge the ev or ‘phone, watch the TV or use the computer or even cook a meal. Text alerts during the day and smart meters during the night will run our lives.

      The NG ESO FES for 2050 contains no back-up plans for when the wind doesn’t blow.

    2. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      There is a lot of misinformation about appliance usage at the moment. I measured a full kettle at 0.25kWh, and a 59 minute wash on a 10kg load machine at under 1.3kWh at 40C. An hour of immersion heater consumes about 2kWh, not 3kWh because operation is actually intermittent. An electric shower can get through 2kWh quite quickly, but it is probably a good way of getting a basin of water for washing up rather than waiting for kettles and mixing. The latter works if the quantity needed is small enough e.g. mugs used for tea., when only a mug full is needed and it needn’t boil.

  16. Nigl
    October 16, 2022

    And in another sign of the stay in power at any cost ignoring the democratic vote it is alleged that many MPs want Sunak as PM. The ‘I am a low tax Tory so I am going to put them up’ I am ripping up Brexit rules but actually aren’t and totally controlled by the Treasury.

    Two faced and useless but that seems to be the necessary qualifications for the job.

  17. Donna
    October 16, 2022

    I think the Net Zero lunacy should be scrapped. It is unaffordable, unachievable and pointless since it will do nothing to change the climate. I think the Government should remove all subsidies to so-called renewable energy companies; if they can’t compete in the market on a level playing field (or relying on private investment), then they should fail. So, cut the price of energy by removing the “green” energy levies and VAT.

    But it doesn’t matter what we think. It doesn’t matter what we vote for. It doesn’t matter who we elect.

    As the treacherous snakes in the Not-a-Conservative-Party are busily demonstrating, this country isn’t a democracy and it isn’t run by people whose priority is the UK and the interests of the British people.

    What Globalist Organisations like the UN, WEF, WHO, IMF want is what we will get, regardless of how we vote. Which is why it really won’t matter if Starmer and the Labour Party get to sit on the Government benches and play at being the Government …. and why, by default, there is no point voting for the Not-a-Conservative-Party.

    1. turboterrier
      October 16, 2022

      Donna
      The global organisations that you mention at the start of your last paragraph are the biggest risk to this country and the world.
      Far too many politicians are sleep walking to their demise.

      1. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        People say some animals smell fear and death as they are taken into the abattoir, don’t the Tory MPs smell the future – even 20 months away. It is even possible a GE could be called in a few short months. Unemployed after Christmas – rotten isn’t it!

    2. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      Donna :

      There could much truth in your last paragraph.

  18. Richard1
    October 16, 2022

    Of course it would be both more effective and cheaper to target help through tax cuts or direct grants (the same thing in effect) to those who need it most. If there has to be a price cap let it work like a reverse green tax which can then be switched the other way to re-coup the money as and when wholesale prices fall. The former deputy governor of the BoE Charlie bean has now suggested this. What has become very clear over the last 2 weeks isn’t that the market doesn’t like tax cuts it is that it won’t (any longer) tolerate out of control borrowing. That is no bad thing.

    But how is Liz truss going to be able to drive any of this or any other free market /supply side reforms? Isn’t her authority and credibility now completely shot and isn’t Jeremy hunt in effect now PM?

  19. Sir Joe Soap
    October 16, 2022

    “The energy price rise is like a massive tax rise”
    So surely the answer is a tax cut, even if temporary? Reduce VAT and possibly lower rate tax to reduce prices and free up more money for people to pay themselves.

    Demand reduction alongside the consequent price reduction will mean any support is nothing like as expensive as projected anyway.
    Like Covid, the answer is protect the vulnerable and let the rest of us continue with life. This scheme makes us all reliant on the State for help, which is socialist and inefficient.

  20. Roy Grainger
    October 16, 2022

    I believe our energy support scheme is twice as costly per head than any of the EU countries has implemented ? Why not review the details of their scheme ? Always this need to reinvent the wheel. See also EU health services.

  21. Nigl
    October 16, 2022

    Great article in TCW how cowardly conservatives bankrupted Britain. Spending/money supply out of control, neither will or courage to tackle it. Truss offered a way out albeit very poorly communicated, instantly crushed by the establishment with her MPs looking after themselves etc.

    If in private reflection they are still fooling themselves, they are, indeed, fools.

  22. The Prangwizard
    October 16, 2022

    As is said ‘don’t start from where you are now’. Today’s problems cannot be fixed as long as the ideology of NetZero, sustainability and the rest of this philosophy prevail. Tragically our society has been taken over and with most of today’s MPs who have the same mind we are lost.

    In some detail for now we must become as near as possible as self-sufficient with existing fossil fuels while we carry on with experimentation of others, but with the most recent coup there is no chance. Our way of life will be rolled back to discomfort and depression and any manner of trouble in the years to come. The elites in charge will not suffer of course.

    We have heard how this government is determined to push sense aside. And where will the food come from if we keep planting millions of trees. How do we expand essential food production as useful land is regularly taken away. The ideology is dangerous as practised.

  23. Lifelogic
    October 16, 2022

    Laura Kuenssberg interviewing Jeremy Hunt just now:- “everyone wants the economy to grow” no, not at all Laura. All the greens, net zero loons and pushers of big government, high taxes and endless government waste clearly do not want the economy to grow. Nor clearly do the people who rig the markets in energy, health care, education, housing, broadcasting, transport…

    I see the BBC has even dug up Matt Hancock. The pointless extended covid lock down and the economic polices of socialist Osborne, Hammond & Sunak and the mismanagement and waste in government at the NHS (Hunt & Hancock) have mainly caused the current mess.

  24. a-tracy
    October 16, 2022

    When the top starts to go on strike you won’t get your ‘investing’. You’re going to get people crashing or cashing
    in their chips. What I’m seeing is small businesses going out of business, one guy is trying to sell his office block that is part of his pension, only one viewing in a year, he’s desperate still paying £13k pa in business rates/park fees, with no income coming in, he got hit with a £300 electricity bill, I don’t know how on an empty office just something else for him to worry about. He’s still got a mortgage on it too. He’s so stressed he’s had to draw his pension early just to have something to live on because you know what when the chips are down for business people there are no benefits to claim. Sadly for him he may have signed up for annuity just before the returns rose! There are now three of seven offices over 1500sqft for sale or to let. And Hunt thinks he can keep whacking business, a quarter of every 1p they make, no first £100,000 at a lower rate, all the time we’ve got Ireland on our doorstep with 12.5% its just a joke!

    The Royal Mail workforce still think they’re in the public sector and can ransom their employer and customers. Volumes dropped after their last strike action and now we’re all going to get a two day service instead of next day, it will be a big problem for them if the majority don’t mind. Invoices are now digital, payments are digital, gift presents can be sent direct from supplier to party boy or girl some even wrap for you! We’ll all end up with a once per week delivery at this rate.

    1. Mickey Taking
      October 16, 2022

      and with Christmas ( I know, I know !!) just round the corner, hard pressed people are going to decide ‘fewer cards, much less postage, hand deliver where possible’ – result will be a crash in postage revenue.

    2. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      Supermarkets and other stores deliver on a next day basis. Couriers will do same day in some cases. Royal Mail has missed an opportunity to provide these services, and thus lower its costs.

  25. Ian B
    October 16, 2022

    The pain of the UK for the UK citizen is that Governments seek personal gratification by subsidising everything and anything ‘just’ to be on message. It is time for the revolution, in more ways than one, remove all ‘subsidies’ from everthing and let the market decide.

    On the energy front the UK citizen is in the majority of cases paying to subsidies Foreign Governments to keep their prices down in their home markets. These companies have pricing caps at home, so rely on the UK for profits. These Companies are not taxed in the UK in a balanced way that is comparable to our own industries, they get a free pass. So at the end of the day in the UK all UK subsidies benefit the Foreign non-contributing taxpayer first.

    The above is in part the contributing factor to the 70 year high for UK taxes, they are kept high to encourage wealth removal from the UK. Shere utter lunacy

  26. agricola
    October 16, 2022

    Start with what we have in terms of energy resources, coal, gas, and oil.

    Coal requires us to open up a mine in Whitehaven to cover the needs of our steel industry and any power stations we have that can still use it.

    Gas from UK sources sea and land should be ring fenced for UK use and sold to users, domestic, industrial, and power generation at extraction cost plus an acceptable profit and distribution cost. Much of the tax extracted by government should go into a national investment fund under anything but government control. Storage facilities should be created nationally. Under no circumstances should extraction companies be allowed to sell at World Market prices to UK users. Nor should they be allowed to supply other than the UK, and this includes the UK government unless after full debate Parliament gives permission.

    UK oil for technical reasons is not always the best to use governed by the end product, so import of oil is a fact of life. Everything I have said about gas applies equally to oil. UK oil should be sold to UK end users at ring fenced prices not international prices and it’s export closely controlled.

    If the extraction industry cannot live with this we create our own. At the same time we fully develope oil and gas resources adjacent the Falkland Islands for the sole benefit of those islands and the UK, not the world market place unless deemed otherwise by Parliament.

    Finally create a National Power and Communications Security Bill with suitable heavy penalties for any of the great unwashed who daily challenge the needs of the majority.

    1. agricola
      October 16, 2022

      Well having asked for solutions at least have the good grace to publish them or say what you disagree with.

  27. Ian B
    October 16, 2022

    If the UK’s taxpayer money had been ‘invested’ as in the ownership of the resource, and not in the political speak of investment ‘give money away in hope’. The UK wouldn’t have become reliant on the political whims of our foreign competition just to keep the lights on. Does any on think they will help us before their own people.

    Just stop all subsidies that are not tied to ownership – NOW

  28. Simon R
    October 16, 2022

    Sir John,

    Commentors above are right to note that we’ve seen good words but little action so far on domestic energy supply. This is the most important part of any plan on energy.

    Regarding the price cap mechanism itself, it would be good to try an income tax-like system, with everyone getting a low cap for the first xx amount of energy that they used, and decreasingly generous bands above. Very low users of power would then be rewarded, whether that is someone with a very small home, or someone who was very determined to reduce their energy usage. This avoids a means cap and all the complications inherent in that.

    The lowest band could be set lower than the current prize freeze, and perhaps the next band up at the level of the current freeze. Thereafter all levels would be higher. It would be an immense relief for the very poor, and nobody could really complain – just use less energy if you want to pay less. The Government’s losses on the scheme would themselves be capped infact.

    This would also be a way for Truss to reclaim the initiative, as at the moment it is fair to say that she is in office but not in power.

    1. Bloke
      October 16, 2022

      Your suggestion appears to be the best one posted today Simon.
      A key benefit is that your method taxes the waste fairly and assists payment for the essential usage.
      Many of those posting today have aired complaints instead of raising constructive ideas for solutions as SJR requested.

    2. miami.mode
      October 16, 2022

      Problem is, Simon, that a relatively immobile pensioner in rural Northumbria may use more fuel than say a millionaire MP with a flat within walking distance of parliament where he or she could spend many hours in heated comfort. Government always has to look for a reasonably simple solution.

  29. Cuibono
    October 16, 2022

    I wonder if also the govt. should ban the breathing of air and buy in ( at taxpayers’ expense), however many cylinders of oxygen we need for however many people inhabit this God forsaken country?
    Yes…and don’t forget the anti air masks (££££££s). M8’s rates…jobs for the boys. Apples in orchards!
    The ultimate lockdown.
    And all that lovely shiny coal lurking with its oily and gaseous buddies under our very feet!!🥶

  30. glen cullen
    October 16, 2022

    The premise of your article is that suppliers costs have risen and that we, by capping the consumer price, have to subsidise the supplier shortfall …I was under the impression that the suppliers where ripping the consumer off with huge profits
    Whether it’s the consumer or via the taxpayer subsidy the energy suppliers gets their inflated asking price paid. It’s a win win to the energy supplier – this whole approach needs a rethink

  31. Lynn Atkinson
    October 16, 2022

    Easy! Stop fighting Russia! The Govt. Confirmed to me that ‘we are not at war with Russia’. So why are we fighting a proxy war? Lift it idiot sanctions which are killing the West!

    1. Bloke
      October 16, 2022

      A single brain occupies a tiny space on Earth, yet one in Russia exerts so much effect, causing others distress in conflict, harm and loss of access to resources.
      Single images can have powerful effect on how people react. There may be an image that could discourage the aggressor from wanting to cause such harm. Exposing that in goodness could be more efficient defence than hostile weaponry.

      1. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        Well thinking about single brains wielding too much power –
        Cameron spoilt child, May straight faced liar, Johnson easily led buffoon, Truss lame duck.
        Next?

      2. Lynn Atkinson
        October 16, 2022

        Ah the aggressor, Ukraine, after 8 years is at last facing defeat. They refused to honour 2 peace treaties – well, there is no money in peace for the globalist western ‘elite’.
        Who did blow up Nordstream 1 and 2 and thus attack Germany? Why no discussion? Why no investigation?

  32. Christine
    October 16, 2022

    There is little point in giving you our ideas, as we the people seem to have no say in how this country is run. We are given a manifesto and vote accordingly then the government implements completely different policies. I’m sick of the lies and traitorous behaviour of our politicians.

    Contributors like me have been telling you for years to scrap the WEF Net Zero agenda but your party will not change course. Next, they will cause food shortages like the Netherlands is doing.

    Don’t you get it yet that you are wasting your time trying to fix something that has been planned for many, many years? Your party was infiltrated long ago because of the candidate selection process.

    The best thing you and your like-minded colleagues can do is quit your corrupt party, join Reform and force a general election.

    Reply If we did that now there would be a Labour majority and Reform would not win a single seat

    1. Donna
      October 16, 2022

      Well do it in 3 weeks’ time then.

      The Not-a-Conservative-Party is destroying this country.

    2. Roy Grainger
      October 16, 2022

      And why exactly wouldn’t we want a Labour majority ? For example Labour actually support the mini budget policy of bringing the 1p basic rate tax cut forward, but PM Hunt doesn’t. Labour support more of the mini budget than Hunt.

      A Labour government might also give us PR, then Reform would sweep up Conservative votes by the million.

  33. Simon R
    October 16, 2022

    Regarding how the banded cap might work for companies, I suppose you’d have to have industry-specific versions of the policy. But again, the lower caps would set a target, encouraging efficiency.

    If (Heaven forbid) the energy crisis rumbled on, the bands could be tightened to encourage even greater savings. If it dissipates, they can be made more generous.

  34. Mickey Taking
    October 16, 2022

    I had reason to attend an NHS hospital last week. On arrival quite busy waiting room -oh dear – the computer’s down they said.
    After 35 minutes (quite acceptable) of watching an incredible number of staff strolling back and forth, rarely even holding the usual clipboard or patient’s notes, and several different ‘porters’ hanging around to wheel bed patients about – I was called. From then on it went well – I await outcome of course.
    The point in this was to highlight amazing numbers of staff appearing to do very little but stroll back and forth.
    What do they all do? Is it like this all day? Surely economies can be made?

    1. Shirley M
      October 16, 2022

      I attend hospital frequently as an outpatient. I never see a busy department and the staff always have time for a chat and a sing song, which is all very nice for the patients, but not the overstressed workload that is supposed to be so prevalent. A & E and the wards may be very different.

      Getting an ambulance in our area is a very different matter. The last time I attempted it I was told the wait would be 10-12 hours. We need to get ourselves to hospital or risk dying while waiting.

      1. Mickey Taking
        October 16, 2022

        This wasn’t A&E but an investigation booked for a few weeks. The worst shambles was a (new?) machine per floor replacing 2/3 – which was almost indecipheral, cashless with laughable instructions, unreadable miniscule rows of keys – a kind lady knelt in order to help the queue put in their car regn numbers in order to pay and escape.
        This is progress?

      2. ChrisS
        October 17, 2022

        Our 83 year old neighboiur had a fall last week. In Dorset, the NHS usually works well and be have excellent GP surgeries and specialist support. We managed to get our neighbour off the floor and waited 2hrs 30minutes for an ambulance. After an hour of tests, they decided he had to go to hospital as he could not walk. His 80 yr old wife went with him and we expected to get a call to go and fetch them at some point.

        They waited in the ambulance outside Bournemouth A & E from 21:30 to 3am. By the time they were admitted, the crew told them that there were 18 ambulances similarly waiting with patients !

        Instead of handling at least three incidents per shift, the crews are having to wait so long outside hospitals that they are down to only one. That means that the service, already short of ambulances, needs three times the number of ambulance just to cover the waiting time ! I’m pleased to report that our neighbour is now back at home and much improved.

    2. Mike Wilson
      October 16, 2022

      The point in this was to highlight amazing numbers of staff appearing to do very little but stroll back and forth

      Indeed. I have often observed the ‘NHS slow shuffle’. They slope around with a sign on their back that says – ‘I will not take any pressure from anyone’.

  35. ChrisS
    October 16, 2022

    The Truss plan was basically right. We certainly need growth but where it went wrong was trying to do too much too quickly. Conventional economics are causing interest rates to rise much too fast for the health of the country. The idea that you need to pile interest rate costs on top of the huge increase in energy prices is just plain wrong.

    Interest rate rises are designed to take money out of people’s pockets so that they spend less and that is supposed to reduce inflation. However, thanks to the internet, we now have incredibly competitive prices across the economy so price increases are no longer about profiteering, they largely only happen where essential, thanks to the increase in world commodity prices, largely thanks to Ukraine and the Covid Pandemic.

    The current level of energy prices has already taken hundreds of pounds out of people’s pockets so, other than to stabilise the currency, I can see no reason for further large interest rate rises. Unfortunately the markets and Bank Governor are wedded to conventional economic theory in the face of very unconventional and unprecedented problems that affect almost every country in the World.

    1. ChrisS
      October 16, 2022

      PS : Why are no commentators talking about the lowering effect on interest rates that the PM’s energy plan will cause ? It was mentioned when the plan was revealed and the suggestion was that inflation would be brought down by 5%. Is this still true ? If it is, our inflation rate will come down far faster than most similar sized countries.

      1. miami.mode
        October 16, 2022

        Chris, it’s the old story. Inflation may reduce but government borrowing will increase. If you feel this is certain how much of your own money would you lend to our government at a fixed rate of interest? Current rate for 5 years seems to be about 4.25%.

        1. ChrisS
          October 17, 2022

          If I had lots of spare cash, I would take some bonds at 4.25%. However, as a portfolio landlord, I have a large chunk of borrowing, (although it’s no more than 30% LTV across the portfolio), and we need to keep all the cash we have in order to be certain we can continue to pay the loans, whatever happens to rates. We kept rents level throughout the pandemic and as a result, everyone paid on time and we didn’t lose a single tenant. However, we have had no choice but to put rents up recently because our borrowing costs have risen dramatically.

  36. Caterpillar
    October 16, 2022

    Question to clarify:
    Does the suggested package reduce CPI (and other indices) in such a way that knock on effects to monetary policy, anything index linked and less industrial action make it worthwhile? (Or does it not reduce CPI.)

    The Alternatives:
    1. Progressive system i.e. a cap at lower levels of consumption (subsidy), a floor at higher levels (tax).
    2. Temporal system i.e. cap now but floor in future.
    3. Historical reference system i.e. x% of previous year’s consumption is capped.
    4. No cap (free market) but bring benefit rises forward and encourage public & private sector pay rises to match inflation (consistent with the monetarist view of inflation).
    5. Fix the govt’s budget committed to energy bail out and match with 1-off wealth tax (e.g. cap will continue until £xBn spent this will be raised by a 1-off wealth tax as asset prices have been distorted by monetary policy; conservative values are that wealth is a reward for entrepreneurship not loose monetary policy).

  37. pjb
    October 16, 2022

    I would like to see the price cap for domestic users limited to a certain number of units per month in order to reduce market distortion. While the ideal solution might be to let the market sort out price, supply and demand and to give targeted financial help to the less well-off, this would be administratively cumbersome, and some deserving cases would always get missed.

  38. formula57
    October 16, 2022

    O/T Some cheer, further to your late inquiry about our use of public services. Using askmyGP to report symptoms, a reply four hours later gave me an appointment two days hence (with a medical professional, though not a GP). Self-administered treatment was prescribed, for review six days later. The review led to me being treated (and cured) eight days later by the practice nurse. I stress I was treated always as an ordinary NHS patient for the privileges and preferences possibly due as an important person did not figure for I made no disclosure that I am a commenter here.

  39. a-tracy
    October 16, 2022

    John, you should have told us you were going to be on TalkTV at 1030.
    I don’t normally watch tv on Sunday at all but I read Portillo was going to be on GB News, I switched on to hear what he had to say about the goings on this week. His green jacket and overplayed music was too much to bear. These red and blue vibrant backgrounds are too bright and distracting so I started to channel hop.

    You seem quite chilled about Hunt, why?

    He’s immediately reversed all tax saving measures. Did the G7 agree to put up corporation tax to 25% (not the 15% in the newspapers) together at their last meeting and the UK reneging on that had to be brought into line. Why isn’t Ireland brought into line? Why doesn’t Ireland pay into NATO it would be like Scotland going off alone and not having to pay their even share of defence. Who defends their Island, the UK perhaps for free?

    1. Donna
      October 16, 2022

      “Who defends their Island, the UK perhaps for free?”

      Got it in one.

      And then they shaft us at every possible opportunity.

    2. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 16, 2022

      Comical, the way that Morgan has gone from Good Morning Britain to Good Evening Nobody, isn’t it?

      1. a-tracy
        October 16, 2022

        Can’t stand Morgan so I turn over anything that I see him on.

      2. Fedupsoutherner
        October 16, 2022

        NLH. He can’t compete with GB News.

  40. Ian B
    October 16, 2022

    What’s the point of Ofgem, set up to protect the consumer in the UK – but taking is orders from foreign suppliers.

    The price cap is a nonsense, in a similar way tuition fees are a farce. Ofgem sets a top price(like the top rate for tuition fees) then everyone sells at that price regardless of costs or service. The consumer has to submit – that is not protection.

    All energy produced in the UK should be sold onto the appropriate grid at the price of the day. It should be up to Government if any surplus is sold outside the UK and always at the market price.

    Just bring back the market and protect those that are the most vulnerable. Vulnerable is the consumer not the suppliers as now.

    1. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      Ian B :

      Ofgem may have been set up to protect the consumer but now they see their job as delivering Net Zero. See Ofgem giving evidence to the HoL Industry and Regulators Committee on the subject “Ofgem & Net Zero” on 30/11/2021.

      They failed badly to do the necessary investigations to protect the consumer against fly-by-night retail energy suppliers for which we are all now paying on our energy bills.

  41. ignoramus
    October 16, 2022

    I am really interested by what you say about targeting energy payments to the poor.

    So far as I understand it, the problem is targeting the very poor. It would be easy if we had means-based benefits, but because of universal pensions and childcare, it then becomes very difficult to separate out who needs help and who doesn’t, and you risk leaving people out. With something time sensitive like this, it’s easier to just throw money at it as a one off.

    I think both the universal pension and universal childcare and complex in this respect. Focussing our money only on those who needed it most would enable us to target them better in times of crisis. I accept this is politically difficult and would have to be done gradually.

  42. Ian B
    October 16, 2022

    What is clear is with Hunt with doing the rounds of the MsM today he( as de-facto PM) is ditching not only the mini budget, but everything the Conservatives stand for and came to power on the back of. He is ditching and trashing the conservative ideals.

    The destruction of the Conservatives is in full left wing liberal mode from with in.

  43. BOF
    October 16, 2022

    Sutely, energy prices will remain high as, with the (effective) change of government there will be little or no fracking, nor much more oil and gas from.the N. Sea. Any chance of abandoning NZ, CC Act has now gone.

    The sheer size of the state, nearly 50% of GDP, is beyond rediculous. Only socialist states have a public sector that big.

  44. RichardP
    October 16, 2022

    Clearly fuel subsidies are now essential unless a large section of the population is to be driven into dire poverty.
    Another contrived step in the direction of state control and a social credit system.

  45. Shirley M
    October 16, 2022

    Question: why do wagon drivers get humongous fines for unknowingly bringing illegal stowaways into the UK, yet the border force and RNLI bring in HUNDREDS each day with impunity? Are they not assisting the traffickers?

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      October 16, 2022

      Oh nice one Shirley. A very good question.

    2. turboterrier
      October 16, 2022

      Shirley M
      People have and are been saying this for months and months.
      Still all the politicians, for in my book all of them are totally of guilty for allowing this to happen by doing in reality sweet bugger all. They hide behind antiquated laws and treaties.

  46. Matthu
    October 16, 2022

    Has anyone ever thought of reserve storage?

  47. John Walter
    October 16, 2022

    When the original North Sea Gas contracts were signed the Gas Council later British Gas being the monopoly buyer was able to dictate terms and bought gas from the North Sea, (Take or Pay) at 8p a therm, (yes that’s right 8p a therm) the companies moaned but still supplied to what afterall is a very lucrative market until 1981 when the then Minister of Energy David Howell claimed British Gas was making too much profit, ie 1500 million per year, (much of which was spent after taxation on improving the National Grid System) raised the price too 16p a therm and introduced the Gas Levy taking 400 million per year into the treasury, (money which could have been spent on improving the infrastructure storage etc) but was instead frittered away on tax cuts.
    Now the solution is simple, to resore a monopoly buyer of energy A National Energy Agency which once again becomes the monopoly buyer of energy to ensure the safe and secure of supply of energy to the UK at the most economic method and price possible.
    Energy sufficient to cover demand would be purchased via a bidding system cheapest first with the Agency having the right to set the maximum price of the highest bid, so any sharp jump in the wholesale price would first be felt by the supply companies and not passed onto the retail and therefore the consumers. There would be very strict contracts of supply with a constant audit to ensure no gaming or rigging the system which would be treated as serious financial fraud.
    Obviously those are the bare bones but to not take full control of our most vital strategic industry would be like handing Fighter Command over to Herman Goering in 1940. I’m sorry to tell you John but energy is far to important to be buffeted by the vagaries of the free market.

    1. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      John Walter : “Energy sufficient to cover demand……”

      The Net Zero Strategy, with intermittent renewables providing the power and no plans for back-up, intends that in the future demand will have to match supply which will be achieved through “customer transformation”.

      The UN’s Susan Michie will be a key adviser to the Government/BEIS/The National Grid.

      BTW, 85% and increasing of wind turbines and 100% of solar panels are built by (coal-fired) China and China controls the raw materials for motors, generators and batteries. So the Net Zero Strategy is “like handing Fighter Command over to Herman Goering in 1940.”

    2. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      I actually saw contract prices for BG purchases at little more than 1p/therm in the 1970s. The low prices offered became a problem for government when they were inadequate to justify bringing gas ashore, with flaring preferred at oil fields. Prices had to be increased. Later, when PRT was brought in, gas was exempted from the worst of the PRT regime, as it would simply have boosted the price that would have to be paid, so it was left largely to recoup the gas levy sums.

  48. James Freeman
    October 16, 2022

    The detail is essential. How will the government protect the taxpayer from a hefty debt if gas prices remain high? But on the other hand, if the price falls below the cap, will consumers benefit immediately?

    There should be a cap on the subsidies to individual households. The issue is complex as homes use different mixes of supplies. So to fix this, the cap on the electric proportion will have to be higher than ideal to compensate. This approach would still save a substantial amount and help reduce demand.

    It would be best if you tied the package of reforms to improving medium-term supply. Give communities the power to allow gas extraction and windmills locally and allow them to receive royalties from the producers. You should grant planning permission for new nuclear plants at all the existing sites (providing safety conditions are met).

  49. beresford
    October 16, 2022

    You can’t legislate to provide gas or power that isn’t there. What we need are urgent measures to increase supply and then prices will take care of themselves. You can’t just let prices rip either because index-linked pensions and salaries will soar and there is no provision to reduce them when the prices come back down.

  50. Fishknife
    October 16, 2022

    You can’t blame politicians in a system where the swing voter supports whomever offers them the most, regardless of the good of the country.
    Proportional representation will only, marginally, alter the cast, not the underlying problem, our two party system is riven with factions on all sides.
    We will continue to spend beyond our income until the markets refuse to lend to us any longer.
    Get used to increasing interest rates.
    The cost of the war with Putin needs to be spread over decades, as were previous wars, and be borne by NATO members equally.
    The price of gas, a consequence of that conflict also needs similar treatment.
    The fairest way to support those on low incomes seems to be a general handout, but I would do it through the energy companies and limit it so there is no increase in cost for the vulnerable and lowest users but everyone else should shoulder the burden – and the incentive to save.
    I really don’t see why I should be paying for years to come to heat Richy’s swimming pool !
    I don’t like the increase in Corporation Tax, but it will principally be paid by Amazon and the power companies in the short term, the trickle down won’t be happening.
    Subsidy targeting, and HS2 funds, should be switched to energy storage not generation. Raise duty on all imports to encourage home production.
    We need to find a way to incentivise Government thrift.

  51. turboterrier
    October 16, 2022

    The Renewable Energy Foundation figures on constraint payments alone for turbines this month so far:-

    Balancing Mechanism Wind Farm Constraint Payments
    Data last updated : 12-Oct-22.
    Show Totals by :
    Year
    Month
    Constraint Datespadlock
    Wind Farmspadlock
    Back to REF Website
    Month Cost MWh Average Price
    2022-10 £26,388,817 397,546 £66

    It’s a lot of money and we are not even into winter. It equates to £1.6m per day +
    You cannot make this up and its been going on for over 20 years

    1. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      The more wind capacity that comes on stream the larger will be the volumes of power curtailed, because surpluses will become both larger and more frequent. What you don’t pay for in curtailment payments if they were abolished would have to be added to bills for power you do use so that the wind farm can cover its costs. This is one reason why wind power will be getting more expensive from now on.

  52. Lester_Cynic
    October 16, 2022

    You should have taken my advice and been the first Reform UK MP

    Sadly you’re too out of touch with the electorate, but it’s not too late

    And I KNOW that this won’t make it past censorship

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 16, 2022

      Your “knowledge” seems as reliable as ever.

      1. Lester_Cynic
        October 16, 2022

        NLH

        I’m pleased that you agree!

        Thank you JR

  53. forthurst
    October 16, 2022

    The question for the Tory Party is:
    How much pain are you prepared to inflict on the British people in order to support the US in its illegitimate
    ambition to become and remain world hegemon? US policy has been created by foreign born political operatives such as Zbigbniew Brzezinski, Madeleine Albright and Henry Kissinger. Unfortunately since they left the stage, the US has been on autopilot because of the inadequacy of the US electoral system to bring forth someone
    who is able to require the re-examination of their foreign policy objectives. Blowing up pipelines with or without assistance from their British vassal and forcing their European vassals to purchase natural gas at three times the going rate whilst the people here delude themselves that we can be self-sufficient in natural gas by fracking when the founder of Cuadrilla asserted the geological conditions in the UK do not support it, or believing in ‘green’ technology, mean we will not receive economical or reliable energy supplies in the future.

    1. R.T.G.
      October 18, 2022

      @ forthurst.
      From today’s online Daily Telegraph, it rather looks, from a careful reading of the second paragraph of this extract, as though Ben Wallace is going to Washington to discuss exactly “how much pain”, and who is going to pay for it in yet more blood and treasure:

      “No 10: Ben Wallace in Washington for Ukraine talks

      Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, has gone to Washington DC today (see the post below at 09.59) and No 10 has now shed some light on the unexpected trip.

      The Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman said: “The US has been, alongside us, one of the leading allies of Ukraine, taking a leading role, so this is a chance for the Defence Secretary to meet with his counterparts and have further discussions about ways we can continue to support [Ukraine].”

      Asked if that could include making further commitments on new military equipment, the spokesman said: “I am not aware of any planned announcements around that. Obviously they will be discussing all aspects of military support and continuing that support.”

  54. turboterrier
    October 16, 2022

    Net Zero Watch team has got the right ideas:-

    1. The rapid granting of consents for a fleet of new Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (CCGTs) of higher thermal efficiency.

    2. The granting of consent for a new fleet of coal fired power stations using the Ultra-Super-Critical technology.

    3. The vigorous support of both further exploration in the North Sea, and onshore through hydraulic fracturing for both natural gas and oil.

    4. The scrapping of plans for Sizewell C, allocating the public money to fund the construction of two to three Small Modular Reactor (SMR) plants by 2029, awarded by competition. 50% of public support will be paid as progress payments (for agreed waypoints) and 50% as a final payment when the project is fully operation on condition that the final date of end-2029 is met.

    https://www.netzerowatch.com/in-a-bad-situation-there-are-no-good-moves-what-the-uk-should-but-will-not-do-to-address-the-energy-crisis/

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      October 16, 2022

      Turbo. Some very sensible ideas there.

  55. KB
    October 16, 2022

    Look, all we have to do is spread millions of tonnes of powdered basalt on the land. Each tonne absorbs a tonne of CO2 from the atmosphere, and it is a fertiliser and soil improver.

    1. Bloke
      October 16, 2022

      Spreading millions of tons would consume energy. Basalt is also hard to grind but does exist as dust via Amazon at about £1 per kg. Does it not spread itself onto soil via volcanoes with automatic self-efficiency at source? However if all we have to do is spread a ton or so each, let’s dig for victory in England.

  56. KB
    October 16, 2022

    In the real world, things are going completely in the reverse direction to the opinions expressed here.
    The energy industries are busy connecting us up with the rest of Europe with interconnectors. This is essential to the vision of a dynamic, load-spreading renewable electricity supply through Europe and beyond.
    Our offshore wind industry is effectively Danish, heavily invested in by Danish pension schemes, and will pay Danish pensions in future.
    This is what your government and “free trade” has done to us.

    1. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      KB : ” This is essential to the vision of a dynamic, load-spreading renewable electricity supply through Europe and beyond.”

      When the wind doesn’t blow in the UK it generally isn’t blowing ovee the whole of the North Sea and northern Europe.

      When it is dark in the UK it also dark over the whole of northern Europe.

      There simpy isn’t sufficient copper to connect up “Europe and beyond”

  57. Donna
    October 16, 2022

    This is the consequence of the Net Zero lunacy. BMW are moving manufacture of the Electric Mini from the UK to China (where they’ll be built using coal-based energy).

    The Eco Lunatics in the British Establishment are completely destroying what’s left of our manufacturing base on the alter of expensive, unreliable “renewable” energy …… and it will do nothing whatsoever to affect the climate.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/10/14/electric-mini-production-moved-britain-blow-green-car-ambitions/

    1. Shirley M
      October 16, 2022

      Yep, the tax base is being driven away because of high tax and energy costs and the benefits bill will rise. What lunacy! I am sure this government is deliberately trashing the UK. NOBODY can be stupid enough to destroy their own economy and country, unless they have a distinctly nasty and unpatriotic agenda.

      1. IanT
        October 16, 2022

        “NOBODY can be stupid enough to destroy their own economy and country”

        I do sometimes wonder…..

        1. Mickey Taking
          October 17, 2022

          Certainly not stupid, contrived.

  58. Ian B
    October 16, 2022

    From the MsM
    “Ofgem has told households to cut their electricity and gas usage this winter as Russia’s war on Ukraine wreaks havoc on global supplies.”

    A very spurious link with the Russian war on Ukraine – the UK’s supply has been wrecked by Government policy without any outside help.

    1. Original Richard
      October 16, 2022

      Ian B :

      Correct.

  59. Mickey Taking
    October 16, 2022

    So how many MPs replied ‘go away ‘ when offered the replacement Chancellor?
    Finally got to Hunt – – bottom barrel last – could be why.

  60. Pauline Baxter
    October 16, 2022

    Sir John, you do not need anyone’s advice or comments on how best to deal with energy prices and markets.
    Your knowledge of how best to run the U.K.’s economy, taxes, markets and finances is the best available.
    You have been told before that YOU should be Chancellor of the Exchequer.
    And since the media are shouting for another change of P.M., I suggest, yet again, Lord Frost.

  61. Al
    October 16, 2022

    A few I have seen around:

    1) Remove VAT from fuel. Costs the govt about the same as subsidising the energy firms, but makes the consumers’ pay go a fifth further, reducing their need to debt finance while making it easier for the companies to get paid.
    2) Start investing in infrastructure to increase supply. Link offshore generation to the mainland. Cost is millions compared to billions in loans.
    3) Bring the cost to connect to the grid into line with other countries where it is a straight fee. In the UK, generation is charged more the further it is from supply, so generation in London gets a subsidy to connect, while generation further out has to pay, reducing the ability to exploit local features for water storage, fuel supply, etc.
    4) Force companies to offer economy seven tariffs or other cheap rate ones and to allow consumers to switch. Make it in their interest and people will switch.
    5) Restore some of our disused multi-fuel power stations and burn waste or biofuels if coal, oil, or gas, is not fashionable. They were often closed due to issue 3 above, so resolving that would make them commercial.

  62. Mickey Taking
    October 16, 2022

    ‘I would be interested in your thoughts on if there could be a cheaper and less all commanding scheme that would work?’
    Response:-
    Well we could get Truss to contact Mr Putin. ‘My Dear Vlad, As you know I’ve kinda been busy. However, now I can discuss this silly misunderstanding going on with Ukraine. Before me, they allowed that blonde fella to create all sorts of mess for us. Now as you know us British are well respected and trustworthy, so I know you will want to help me out a tad? There is this annoying problem with gas which we no longer buy from you. I would like to help your citizens in this upcoming bad winter by giving you millions of roubles. Exchange of course required, so how about turning the pipelines back on and shipping us lots of LPG? What do you say, do we have a deal old chap?
    да, конечно (yes of course).

    1. Mark
      October 16, 2022

      We could probably do with a deal on diesel, which is now getting expensive and in short supply. It is also used as a heating fuel in larger boilers. EU attempts to avoid all Russian oil from next month are going to be particularly disruptive for diesel supply in Europe, with ships having to cross via Suez to swap for supply that would normally stay East of Suez for Asia.

      1. R.Grange
        October 17, 2022

        Red diesel is massively used for agricultural vehicles, so the huge rise in red diesel prices could put farmers out of business. Let’s think who could possibly want that.

  63. Original Richard
    October 16, 2022

    Sir John,

    Off topic but very instructive as to how totally powerless or incapable or dysfunctional or aloof our elected Government has become when they cannot even stop the Civil Service and our institutions from profligate waste of tax-payers’ money :

    “NHS spends £40m a year on 800 ‘diversity officers’ as furious campaigners argue money could be spent on extra 1,200 nurses as they demand resources focus on frontline services”

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11319279/NHS-spends-40m-year-800-diversity-officers-campaigners-say-fund-1-200-nurses.html

  64. rose
    October 16, 2022

    This could be much like the nursing home conundrum. The prudent and the frugal end up paying for the profligate. As I understand it, there are people who have turned their heating on already and are expecting to have it paid for by the taxpayer. Then there are others who have not turned on their heating and who have turned the hot water to tepid.The latter may go through the winter without turning on the heating at all, though they may turn the water up a tad. Will HMG feel it is right they should be paying more than they should, just to subsidise others who have not economised?

    The problem with the policy of mass subsidy is that it interferes with the market. It encourages some people to use more gas and then the price does not come down. I really do not like all this talk either of having a two tier system of charging. Who would get the lower tariff? Where would the line be drawn? This must be nipped in the bud as more and more big corporates are attracted by the idea – as they are to all manner of bogus left wing ideas.

    1. rose
      October 16, 2022

      Surely the obvious thing for HMG to do is remove VAT and the green levies from our bills. Also get the standing charge reduced, as at the moment so much of the bill is made up of tax and standing charge, including social levies, that people may not see the point of reducing gas consumption when it is not the major part of the bill.

      1. rose
        October 16, 2022

        As the powers that be have thrown such a tantrum over tax cuts, I suppose they would not allow these taxes to be removed. They would rather destroy us and their own party so long as we stayed aligned with the EU.

  65. Mark
    October 17, 2022

    The schemes are incomplete, and don’t provide the right market incentives. Domestic customers should have a lower social tariff, with seasonally larger allowance for winter than summer. That should cover say 3MWh of electricity and 10MWh of gas for duel fuel households over a year, with additional use charged at a market rate. It should not apply to anyone on a fixed price contract, but should be priced the same for prepayment meters. Standing charges should be largely eliminated and reallocated to per kWh charges so that the social tariff provides supply to prepayment meters, where the allowance would be daily. The idea is to provide an incentive to economise. Those without a gas supply need a more generous electricity allowance.

    The arrangements for larger customers are rather cobbled together. It seems that contracts do not fit easily into the scheme, which us why it is of short initial duration, as it is certain to need amendment. It has been suggested that the idea is to encourage businesses to take out fixed price contracts, but the reality remains that in the volatile market obtaining hedges in volume at acceptable prices remains difficult because of the collateral that has to be posted. The adequacy of collateral available remains an issue. The cap on the extent of price guarantees is certainly smaller than was originally anticipated. Again, it may make better sense to guarantee a portion of previous supply with reasonable certainty and leave marginal extra consumption at full market prices.

    It is clear that no agreement was reached with generators making excess profits. For those being subsidised, the first step should be to eliminate the subsidies that are no longer needed, perhaps with some backstop in the event that gas prices normalise again. Nuclear generators should be invited to contribute to an investment fund to build new plants: a scheme like Certificates of Deposit that can be drawn down against new investment, but with the possibility that they may not be the operator, but rather an equity investor, but also with a mechanism to attach debt funding on drawdown. In the mean time the funds can reduce government borrowing. UKA taxes should be suspended, as they only serve to increase wholesale prices and increase the cost of subsidy required, as well as boosting profits of non fossil generation. Intermittent generators should be charged a large slice of the balancing mechanism costs as well as a proper contribution to network costs to allow their remote generation to reach market. Absorbing those costs, largely caused by them, would lower charges in the rest of the market, and create a fairer framework for the future, while allocating the charges more appropriately, and reducing their profits accordingly. Taken together these measures might knock some £25bn off the bill for subsidy.

    A further area that needs looking at is interconnector trade. We have been exporting large amounts of electricity, inevitably driving up the cost of providing it, particularly when we have cranked up CCGT or emergency STOR to make it possible. At the same time, we have also seen excess wind leading to exports at very low and possibly negative prices. To some extent, removing subsidies will halt the low price trade. It is certainly not right that generators should be subsidised to export at UK consumer expense. That includes the extra costs incurred in meeting export demand when the wind isn’t blowing.

    It should be noted that the present plans drive a coach and four through REMA. Giving the market confidence that the government is working towards ensuring a better supply of gas through promoting fresh investment at home and abroad and is more widely set on a course of aiming for low cost energy and not unaffordable net zero dreams is vital. That would calm markets. Pursuing the old course will see them become frenetic with each sign of problems as the wind fails and capacity proves inadequate to meet demand without rationing.

  66. Stred
    October 17, 2022

    You may have time to read this badly translated article by a German gas engineer SJR. He says that the assurances that LNG from other sources cannot possibly replace the Siberian pipeline gas this winter because of problems storing re gassing and mixing it into the system as well as finding enough ships and terminals. Europe’s industries will have to close down this winter.

    https://thesaker.is/germanys-failing-stored-nat-gas-lng-experiment/

  67. Mark
    October 17, 2022

    It looks like Mr Hunt has no clue about energy policy either.

  68. DW
    October 17, 2022

    I would be interested in your thoughts on if there could be a cheaper and less all commanding scheme that would work?

    I would suggest an adaptation of the previous energy price cap system. The previous energy cap was designed to limit the penalty for being a loyal customer and prevent extortionate price rises to customers in very short time frames – there would be several months warning. The downside of this cap was the smaller energy companies going bust as they were unable to pass on the rapid increase in costs quickly.

    The aim of any new energy price cap must be:
    • affordable – for all stakeholders (residents, businesses, energy companies and the government)
    • fair – wasteful use should not be subsidised while those most in need must be able to afford not to freeze and sit in the dark

    Less vital but still important aims are:
    • promote energy efficiency – lower demand will reduce costs just as well as increased supply with benefits to the environment and reducing dependence on other countries
    • promote local growth

    I propose that energy costs are treated in a similar way to income tax bands – I would propose 3 bands to start. The first X units of energy used in a given time period has a low price cap. This price cap can be set significantly below market rates in the short term and the government would top up this rate. This would ensure everyone has access to at least some energy. This price cap can rise as the government support ends – it can smooth out shocks to energy prices.
    The second band would be the next Y units above the first band – a price cap set in the same way as the previous energy price cap.
    The final band would have no price cap at all. I would envision only the most wasteful energy users would reach this.

    I feel this would be a fair, affordable proposal that promotes energy efficiency. It can easily be tweaked to increase or reduce support as required.

    Long term, if the UK can reduce demand for imported energy by increasing nuclear and other local renewable generation along with storage solutions then we could virtually eliminate energy shocks such as we are suffering now. There are lots of suggestions above about eliminating net zero – restarting coal and expanding gas & oil with fracking. Ignoring pollution and other environmental issues, this simply ties us further into global energy markets where demand from elsewhere will drive up our prices.

Comments are closed.