London Mayor Boris Johnson and energy secretary Ed Davey must do more to ensure Londoners aren't left out in the cold by rocketing energy bills.
Murad Qureshi AM is a Labour member of the London Assembly
Today is Fuel Poverty Awareness Day, yet with energy prices skyrocketing by up to 11 per cent this winter it is unlikely many people are unaware of this growing crisis.
National Energy Action estimates that as a direct result of the recent round of price hikes, an additional 266,000 households were made fuel poor. That is equivalent to a town a little bigger than Stoke-on-Trent.
In London the picture is stark. Before the price hikes, well over half a million London households were fuel poor. Yet London has got a raw deal from the energy companies – and not just on pricing.
Since April 2008, energy companies have been required to deliver home insulation measures to households as part of the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target, a programme that was renewed by the coalition following the election.
However, figures from the Energy Savings Trust show that while 14.7% of homes nationally have received measures, the number for London is only 7.2%.
London has been hindered because it is in general more expensive to insulate homes in London due to the higher occurrence of solid wall properties and flats. Despite their huge profits, this has given energy companies little incentive to retrofit homes in London when they can do it much cheaper in other regions.
The energy companies’ shortfall has been matched by a failure of the mayor to deliver his own target to retrofit 200,000 homes in London by 2012. In the end, the Mayor delivered in 88,000 homes.
What is worse, from this April the Mayor will no longer be directly funding home retrofit measures and will instead rely on those very same energy companies to retrofit London homes once the new Energy Company Obligation and Green Deal are fully introduced.
This is a dangerous strategy and one that could leave Londoners cold.
CERT essentially failed due to the lack of regional targets compelling energy companies to deliver their obligations in London – allowing a flight of measures out of London and into the regions where retrofitting was cheaper. But despite the stronger focus on solid wall insulation within ECO, these regional targets are still absent. Furthermore, the lack of interest so far in the Green Deal should be a worry for the Mayor.
But the situation is worse than that.
As a result of the gap between the end of the existing retrofitting schemes and the new schemes becoming fully functional, the Insulation Industry Forum predicted 625 jobs will be lost in London during 2013.
The energy secretary, Ed Davey, has failed to commit to introducing regional targets. Given the evidence, this should be a minimum assurance he – particularly as a London MP – should be instituting within the scheme. Without this the government is letting down hard pressed households who could desperately use a little help to reduce their energy bills.
See also:
• Osborne’s dash for gas will worsen fuel poverty – December 6th, 2012
• We need a new approach to tackling fuel poverty – November 9th, 2011
• Warnings over fuel poverty targets as fat cat energy chief enjoys £2 million bonus – July 25th, 2011
• Westminster must take on energy giants to prevent fuel poverty – June 8th, 2011
• Fuel poverty and social inequality should be the focus – not fuel cost – March 17th, 2011
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
20 Responses to “Londoners shouldn’t be left out in the cold – Davey and Boris need to act”
Newsbot9
Absolute nonsense, as usual, on most issues. Pensions are not hidden, and they’re paid from general revenue. Next.
And keep claiming that taxation, not a massive expense for lower-paid workers, is equivalent to their food, housing, utility and transport bills – all of which you’re inflating.
Keep using your crooked logic, that the poorer workers should in fact LOSE far more cash, you’d rob them of far more than that over their lifespan for the equivalent benefits delivered from the private sector.
Keep talking about anything but the topic, as you delight in the misery of the poor you’re creating.
LB
1. The banks have profited. No they haven’t. Most haven’t increased profits, most are still making losses, particularly those involved in QE.
2. QE funding government. Yep, no one is lending to the government bar those forced too. Not surprising that the banks aren’t making money if all QE has done is made them lend to the state, whose spent it.
3. Shortage of Gilts. There’s no shortage. People aren’t lending to the state. There is no demand and hence no shortage. See point 2, where the QE is just about funding deficit spending, not about loans in the economy. You might as well be honest and get the printing presses going. See Zimbabwe. Latest I hear the have 200 quid in the bank, for the entire government
That’s just for starters.
Then there is the recommendations. Government to invest. In what? HS2 which has a negative return. ie. The tickets receipts will not cover the debt servicing, running costs and pensions. So who gets screwed for the bill?
A national investment bank? Yep, muppets like Vince Cable playing with other people’s money and no personal risk. You’re free to start your own bank and invest in Green technologies (or is it harvesting taxpayers?)
On the QE. Why have they omitted the penal rate of interest? The UK government has lost 30 bn on Brown’s share trading in banks (like his gold trading). Penal rates of interest has earned it 35 bn. At the same time its now taxing capital. Total tax take from the banking industry, 220 bn over 4 years.
Capital ratios have been reduced. Combine that with taking capital, high taxes, low profits because of the loss, and all work to reduce the amount available for loans. Throw in peer to peer lending (no gearing), and loans are going to go one way, down.
Eventually, it will be just government favourites that get loans. Like Greece.
Newsbot9
Yes, I’m sure that’s your policy. You’re trying to drive us towards Greece and Zimbabwe, by fighting growth at all costs.
LB
Nope. I’m in favour of growth in the economy. However, by growth you and poltiicians mean growth in the tax they take off people.
However given the 7,000 bn of debts. Spending going up above inflation at 700 bn a year. Taxation at 500 bn a year.
Government cannot pay its debts unless it takes more money off people.
That’s the truth about what you and politicians mean by growth.
LB
You could of course tell us who pays for the growth? Is it going to be those people on the dole who, if they go back to work provide the growth in taxes that the government needs? If so, put some numbers to it. How many back to work, how much money saved for each one and how much tax are they going to pay?