At a time when fuel bills are going through the roof and the country is starting to suffer from the policies that they imposed on us at the behest of the deluded and neo-Malthusian Greens, what do you think that the UK energy regulator Ofgem is considering as a priority? Is it securing as best it can the best deals for fuel, or being realistic about the possibilities of coal or calling for more fracking or even agitating for nuclear? Is it defending the customers of the various energy companies or making the case to government for tax and duty reductions on fuel?
Is it bugger. It’s trumpeting about the expansion of Ofgem’s diversity and inclusion empire according to a post by the blogger Nanny Knows Best. Yes at time when there are said to be some Britons who are worrying about whether they will physically survive the winter Ofgem are wasting taxpayers money on yet more useless diversity guff. This sort of thing, at a time like this is morally indefensible. It looks like public sector pisstaking when everyone else is struggling. It would be bad enough waste at the best of times but now when things are bad it’s utterly revolting.
We were sold energy privatisation on the promise we would get better service because of competition. Now all competition has been removed from the market and the remaining big players all put up their prices on the same day is it time to take these money mills back into public ownership?
Yes, I’m with Roy, we need to seriously consider public as opposed to private investment into essential services?
The problem is that public money comes from the already stressed taxpayer. The government has no money of its own only the money it extorts from the public. Maybe the gas and the wider fuel markets would work better and in a way more favourable to the customer if there were not already a multitude of taxes on fuel?
We could recreate the old local gas and electricity boards but it would be enormously expensive, may not solve the problems that need to be solved and may well give us a whole lot more issues to tackle.
Competition should have kept prices reasonable although competition on its own cannot do this if the price of the raw commodity is high. I agree that what we are getting is basically a private monopoly with very little competition. The question is would switching back to a government monopoly be any better?
Well at least it might stop politicians slopping shoulders and fobbing us off with “its private now so not us gov”. It actually seems the government is now just a zombie institute dedicated to the enrichment of its own MPs and the production of excuses and hard talk.
For a long time UK MP’s basically rubber stamped EU legislation and this created the phenomenon of the Zombie Parliament of which you speak. It will take a generation for the current self enriching and ‘not me guv’ politicians to be replaced with those who are willing to be considered accountable for both successes and failures.
For a long time UK MP’s basically rubber stamped EU legislation and this created the phenomenon of the Zombie Parliament of which you speak. It will take a generation for the current self enriching and ‘not me guv’ politicians to be replaced with those who are willing to be considered accountable for both successes and failures.
No, nationalization will not make the energy industry (or indeed any other industry) better. Its the governments interference (price caps, net zero crap, etc) that caused many of the energy firms to go bust. Regardless of how much public may get upset by the profits they make, putting the politicians in charge will only make things worse.
Do you really think so Andy? It’s about 35 years since water was sold off and in that time not a single new reservoir has been constructed. The population has gone up by circa 10,000,000 and the industry has spent a grand total of about £85 per household on maintenance. Not £85 a year £85 in about 35 years. Leaks are at an all time high and billions have been made in profits from essentially privitised monopolies. My daughter lives in a desert area in Spain and has a 3 bedroom villa with a swimming pool, she pays less than a third in water charges than I do. Now I am facing even higher bills and a hosepipe ban. How could it be worse?
Hmmmm, no reply then. I must say a kind of expected that.
Hello Roy, it’s not as though I visit this site every day!
In response to your comment, yes it can always be worse, HM government make a pigs ear of most things they are still in charge of so I’m sure if Whitehall was still running the water industry that would be as overstated and obsessed with diversity as the rest of the public sector.
Regarding the lack of new reservoirs – that again is due to local and central governments that deny planning permission (was a good article on this is on the Spectator the other day).
Finally, lest I come off as some hardcore anarchism-capitalist I’d prefer utilities were customer owned mutual like Nationwide Building society (iirc Welsh water was a co-op), so profits would be paid back to the consumer as dividends. It really annoys me how given the historic failures of state-run industries the left ignore the mutual mode and keep bringing up nationalization.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply Andy, I agree with some of what you say. It’s clear both of us want what’s best for the everyday people but maybe we differ on how that can be done. Have a great day.
I agree that when government’s get involved in solving problems they often make things worse. Look at the NHS for example. It was created to ensure that the ordinary Briton got a comprehensive national healthcare system as opposed to a piecemeal and localised one. Unfortunately choosing a centralised state run model rather than giving every citizen funding to engage with already existing independent and charitable medical entities, has created a whole new and different set of problems.
You are correct about your comments on planning.
I also agree with you about the role of mutuals. This model is in my view underused.
Agree that there’s been a lack of investment in reservoirs and associated infrastructure but it’s not all down to lack of investment. Planning regs play their part in stopping necessary infrastructure like this.
Surly planning problems are the result of ineffective government. A local council official told me a few years ago the council was considering the compulsory purchase of land my garage and those of my neighbours stand on. It seems that if government wants it can take but only if your taking from little people and certainly never from friends or party donors.
Agree there. To paraphrase President Clinton, ‘it’s the taxes, stupid’. Remove the excessive taxation and regulation of domestic and industrial fuels and we might then have a functioning market.