Possible Government Intervention on Energy- thoughts?

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

No because I live on my own in a 1 bedroom flat and so would never reach 2k. So basically I would get nothing despite being officially classed as in poverty due to the amount I have to pay in rent. Capping it at 2k would be subsidising well off people in big houses.

 

[SE4 Red]

No because I live on my own in a 1 bedroom flat and so would never reach 2k. So basically I would get nothing despite being officially classed as in poverty due to the amount I have to pay in rent. Capping it at 2k would be subsidising well off people in big houses.

Well , after the October prise rise the average bill is going to be well over £3500 so good chance you will be paying more than £2000 if the gov does nothing.

 

[Glover_elbow]

The first thing that needs to change is to address the open market, regulatory measures are the only way to police the market and reign in the astronomical profits. The energy sector is not the only segment that needs to be regulated.

But there's zero chance of this government doing so, because they are essentially puppets to the party doners, who obviously want an unregulated market.

The thing that really, really makes me angry is that the only measure this government can come up with is to potentially subsidise bills with public money. In other words the energy companies don't lose a penny, their profits are intact and yet more money is channelled from the public purse into private ownership.

Successive Conservative government's since thatcher have raped the riches of the state, time and again and they've been allowed to do so without any redress.

It's a national scandal.

Rape is the operative word and we should be using such emotive language because that's what it is. The board rooms of these energy giants are committing financial rape they are taking fundemantal rights of individuals to food shelter and energy without consent

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Well , after the October prise rise the average bill is going to be well over £3500 so good chance you will be paying more than £2000 if the gov does nothing.

Yes average. I live somewhere much smaller than average. If they did this I would be absolutely fuming. My current plans are to not put the heating on at all this winter. This is exactly the sort of thing the ******* would do. I'll end up subsiding some posh ***** in a 12 bedroom house in Hertfordshire, while I freeze to death.

 

[Nano]

No because I live on my own in a 1 bedroom flat and so would never reach 2k. So basically I would get nothing despite being officially classed as in poverty due to the amount I have to pay in rent. Capping it at 2k would be subsidising well off people in big houses.

It sounds like they will set the price cap at £2k, not individual bills. That just means that they will use the average to work out the unit price. You'll still pay for the amount you use, just the average will be £2k. I'm a high user so I already pay more than £2k now even though the price cap is less than £2k.

 

[thewanderer]

I don't know people keep banging on about nationalisation. You can't nationalise Aramco or Equinor etc so it doesn't solve the problem.

 

[thewanderer]

Slightly avoiding the question

But, in terms of BP and SHELL I don’t think anyone thinks that would be financially viable to bring these into state ownership

BUT, you probably should change the tax system and introduce a windfall tax or move to something like Norway for BP and SHELL. The argument is they will invest in green renewables and the reality is the profits are paying shareholders

If you creating a state owned company that will invest in green energy you aren’t relying on the green transition in the hands of monopolies and capitalists who’s sole aim is profit and they make more from fossil fuels than green energy

Then also using companies like Bulb going bust and the government paying Octupus billions to take over their customers to build a supply State owned company that rivals the big 5 and invests rather than pay put billions in profits to investors

I’d switch to a public owned company and it’s odd Labour don’t propose that when nationalisation was a Starmer pledge

There is already a windfall tax on North sea production.

 

[Soutra]

The issue here is that the wholesale price of energy is very high - producers are making billions (although it's still a small percentage of their turnover) - but the amount retailers can charge per unit is limited by OFGEM. Retailers are just about surviving (34 went under).

If the retailers were nationalised, then the government department that took over would be buying energy on the same wholesale markets, and trying to sell it at a price which we can afford to pay, and losing billions.

Why would a government - of whatever persuasion - pay money to nationalise businesses that are breaking even at best, and then probably lose loads of money as the wholesale energy price increases. I'm pretty sure Keir Starmer has figured this out.

 

[Ironops]

Saw a report in the press yesterday that it may cost £100bn over 2 years to keep prices down. For £100bn we could almost certainly nationalise the gas and power generation and the grid and it would then be an asset going forward - instead of paying £100bn to private companies who pay it on to shareholders

Privatisation was always a massive con - even at the time it was obvious. Thatcher famously said its 'selling the family silver back to the family' conveniently ignoring the fact that it was the family that owned it in the first place!

 

[Ironops]

The issue here is that the wholesale price of energy is very high - producers are making billions (although it's still a small percentage of their turnover) - but the amount retailers can charge per unit is limited by OFGEM. Retailers are just about surviving (34 went under).

If the retailers were nationalised, then the government department that took over would be buying energy on the same wholesale markets, and trying to sell it at a price which we can afford to pay, and losing billions.

Why would a government - of whatever persuasion - pay money to nationalise businesses that are breaking even at best, and then probably lose loads of money as the wholesale energy price increases. I'm pretty sure Keir Starmer has figured this out.

Which is why we need to nationalise the production - its currently sold on an open market at market prices, if it was nationalised we wouldnt need to do that

 

[BoroPhil]

Any idea what would happen to anyone who has already fixed on a relatively high tariff, assuming there would be a big increase? Would they just lose out and still pay more?

 

[ThatFragranceGuy]

Any idea what would happen to anyone who has already fixed on a relatively high tariff, assuming there would be a big increase? Would they just lose out and still pay more?

Probably, which is what makes plans like this not ideal as many will have taken a fox to try and avoid the rises. You may have to pay substantial exit fees to get out

 

[Emmersons_BrazillianDong]

Saw a report in the press yesterday that it may cost £100bn over 2 years to keep prices down. For £100bn we could almost certainly nationalise the gas and power generation and the grid and it would then be an asset going forward - instead of paying £100bn to private companies who pay it on to shareholders

Privatisation was always a massive con - even at the time it was obvious. Thatcher famously said its 'selling the family silver back to the family' conveniently ignoring the fact that it was the family that owned it in the first place!

Yes. If you read the thread mate the 100bn is about right but that's only for residential properties.

Businesses would still subject to massive rates which is a big part of the impending recession. I think I read that something like 12m people in the country are employed by Small and Medium sized enterprises. That's a whole lot of people who are going to to be in a precarious job position.

Ironically the tax avoiding corporations will be better cushioned

 

[Ex Footy Legs]

The first thing that needs to change is to address the open market, regulatory measures are the only way to police the market and reign in the astronomical profits. The energy sector is not the only segment that needs to be regulated.

But there's zero chance of this government doing so, because they are essentially puppets to the party doners, who obviously want an unregulated market.

The thing that really, really makes me angry is that the only measure this government can come up with is to potentially subsidise bills with public money. In other words the energy companies don't lose a penny, their profits are intact and yet more money is channelled from the public purse into private ownership.

Successive Conservative government's since thatcher have raped the riches of the state, time and again and they've been allowed to do so without any redress.

It's a national scandal.

Great post. The uk public are super fcuking thick though and keep falling for the Tory lies

 

[Ex Footy Legs]

Yes. If you read the thread mate the 100bn is about right but that's only for residential properties.

Businesses would still subject to massive rates which is a big part of the impending recession. I think I read that something like 12m people in the country are employed by Small and Medium sized enterprises. That's a whole lot of people who are going to to be in a precarious job position.

Ironically the tax avoiding corporations will be better cushioned

The tories will have to do something for small businesses because as you say, if not millions of jobs will go and it’s going to be within the next 8 weeks

 

[Soutra]

Which is why we need to nationalise the production - its currently sold on an open market at market prices, if it was nationalised we wouldnt need to do that

The gas and oil in British waters is licensed by the Oil and Gas Authority - a UK government agency - to firms that operate rigs and extract the gas and oil.

Some of the licensees are nominally British companies, like BP, some are not, like Exxon or Equinor.

Just replacing the British owned licensees with a government department wouldn't really change anything. I'd guess they are good at looking for, finding, extracting and delivering gas and crude oil. Could the government do it cheaper or better? Unlikely.

Would it safeguard energy supplies in the future? Possibly, but it would probably be better to spend the money that would cost on developing more renewable sources of electricity like Seagreen. Clean green electricity generated in the UK is a better bet than extracting dirty hydrocarbons to generate electricity.

 

[Ironops]

The gas and oil in British waters is licensed by the Oil and Gas Authority - a UK government agency - to firms that operate rigs and extract the gas and oil.

Some of the licensees are nominally British companies, like BP, some are not, like Exxon or Equinor.

Just replacing the British owned licensees with a government department wouldn't really change anything. I'd guess they are good at looking for, finding, extracting and delivering gas and crude oil. Could the government do it cheaper or better? Unlikely.

Would it safeguard energy supplies in the future? Possibly, but it would probably be better to spend the money that would cost on developing more renewable sources of electricity like Seagreen. Clean green electricity generated in the UK is a better bet than extracting dirty hydrocarbons to generate electricity.

I totally agree we need to invest much more in green energy production - but sadly its still years from fruition (just in terms of getting stuff built), and we need solutions now really

 

[thewanderer]

I totally agree we need to invest much more in green energy production - but sadly its still years from fruition (just in terms of getting stuff built), and we need solutions now really

Big glut of cheap renewables coming online over the next few years thankfully.

 

[MolteniArcore]

The issue here is that the wholesale price of energy is very high - producers are making billions (although it's still a small percentage of their turnover) - but the amount retailers can charge per unit is limited by OFGEM. Retailers are just about surviving (34 went under).

If the retailers were nationalised, then the government department that took over would be buying energy on the same wholesale markets, and trying to sell it at a price which we can afford to pay, and losing billions.

Why would a government - of whatever persuasion - pay money to nationalise businesses that are breaking even at best, and then probably lose loads of money as the wholesale energy price increases. I'm pretty sure Keir Starmer has figured this out.

This is the problem I think. It's the producers that are coining it in and they are using the global energy price. Not sure there is much we can do.

 

[ThatFragranceGuy]

The gas and oil in British waters is licensed by the Oil and Gas Authority - a UK government agency - to firms that operate rigs and extract the gas and oil.

Some of the licensees are nominally British companies, like BP, some are not, like Exxon or Equinor.

Just replacing the British owned licensees with a government department wouldn't really change anything. I'd guess they are good at looking for, finding, extracting and delivering gas and crude oil. Could the government do it cheaper or better? Unlikely.

Would it safeguard energy supplies in the future? Possibly, but it would probably be better to spend the money that would cost on developing more renewable sources of electricity like Seagreen. Clean green electricity generated in the UK is a better bet than extracting dirty hydrocarbons to generate electricity.

I think people are under the impression we can just say "we are nationalising this!" And suddenly we own the entire end to end process and can start selling energy at cost price, ignoring the skills, expertise, legal challenges etc and think it's a simple option that has just been ignored.

Like you say, massive investments in green energy required, new incentives for self generation and storage schemes would reduce load on the grid and overhaul planning limitations on wind farms which are currently hobbled. All far better than trying to seize control of dwindling resources.