Energy Secretary Ed Miliband (Image: Getty)
Households face an “unfair” hike in electricity bills under a government plan to change the cost of energy depending on where you live, experts have warned. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband is considering plans to introduce “zonal” pricing, so that energy costs more in areas where demand is highest or there is a shortage of supply. The aim is to encourage major industries to locate plants where energy is available, cutting the need to build new, expensive infrastructure.
But the former Labour leader was warned that ordinary households must be “shielded” from higher bills. Frank Aaskov, director of energy and climate change policy with UK Steel, said: “We are talking about some domestic consumers perhaps needing to be shielded. We are also talking about the fairness of whether consumers down south have to pay higher energy bills compared to up North.”
Andy Manning, from Citizens Advice, said some households might benefit from a regional pricing scheme, but he said: “We have to remember that some consumers who cannot be flexible will need protection and we have to make sure they are not worse off through that. But a cleverly designed, targeted bill support programme, which is necessary anyway, can then hopefully protect those who may lose out.”
They were speaking to a House of Lords Committee, which concluded in a report that regional pricing could ultimately lead to lower bills if done correctly.
The Lords Industry and Regulators Committee said in a report: ”The Government is currently considering reforms to the electricity market. In particular, it is considering a move to zonal pricing, which would see Great Britain’s electricity market split into a series of regional zones with their own prices. A decision on whether to proceed with this reform is imminent.
“We believe that, on balance, zonal pricing should enable better use of existing grid capacity and reduce the amount of grid that needs to be built. This should lower the cost of electricity by encouraging generation and industrial consumers to locate closer to one another, provided that the transition and its risks are managed well.
“However, the Government would need to carefully assess the impacts on generators and major consumers that are unable to move in response to different prices, including whether they should receive transitional support.”
Mr Miliband has said that regional pricing would not mean higher bills for ordinary consumers.
The Lords report also warned the Government that unless it drastically steps up the scale and pace of building more energy generation and network infrastructure, it is in danger of missing its clean power target of decarbonising the electricity system by at least 95% by 2030.
Baroness Taylor of Bolton, chairwoman of the committee, said: “The electricity grid is an essential part of modern life for households, businesses and transport links. Recent outages in Spain, Portugal and Heathrow have shown the devastating disruption that failures can cause.
“Given the scale of changes needed to the planning, regulation and delivery of energy infrastructure, and the UK’s historic record of delivering major infrastructure projects, our report questions the feasibility of meeting the clean power target.
“Time is already running out, and there is no room for complacency. The Government and the sector must ramp up their efforts to have a chance of success.”
Major petition to stop benefits for asylum seekers hits huge milestone
The petition could trigger a debate in Parliament (Image: Getty)
A petition to stop asylum seekers from getting benefits has passed a major milestone. After surpassing 125,000 signatures, the document, which calls for the cessation of “financial and other support for asylum seekers,” may trigger a parliamentary debate. It reads: “This petition is to advocate a cessation of financial and other support provided to asylum seekers by the government. This support currently includes shelter, food, medical care (including optical and dental), and cash support.
“I believe that such provisions may inadvertently incentivise illegal migration, particularly via the English Channel. This petition is to urge the Government to discontinue these support measures and payments.” The deadline to sign it is June 20, after it has been live for six months. This is the case for all petitions to Parliament. The Government responds to all petitions that get more than 10,000 signatures, and an update on the webpage reads: “Waiting for 3 days for a Government response.”
On Monday, the Conservative MP for Gordon and Buchan, Harriet Cross, told the House of Commons: “New research shows that foreign nationals are claiming almost £1 billion in benefits each month. We now face the highest asylum claims ever recorded, up another 9% since Labour took office.
Minister Seema Malhotra has defended the government’s record on asylum (Image: Getty)
“Meanwhile, [the] 42,000 appeal backlog at the end of 2024 is projected to more than double to almost 100,000 by the end of this year and the Home Secretary herself has admitted to the media that her White Paper would cut immigration by just 50,000. This is utterly inadequate.”
She added: “Without real deterrence and stricter measures, the visa processing delays will only worsen, so will the minister commit today to two concrete measures – first, implementing the previous Conservatives’ £38,000 threshold and introducing a legally binding annual migration cap that actually delivers accountability?”
Labour migration minister, Seema Malhotra, said Ms Cross’s question was “yet another example of the Opposition wanting to rewrite history”.
She added: “They quadrupled net migration to record levels, and she will indeed want to correct her facts I think on the immigration White Paper which will be reducing net migration by considerably more than she suggested, and indeed, what the Home Secretary has also said – now indeed, the latest figures show that since this Government came to power, almost 30,000 foreign criminals, failed asylum seekers and others with no right to be in the UK have been removed.”
A petition to stop benefits from being given to asylum seekers has passed 125,000 signatures. (Image: Getty)
Parliament’s website says: “Petitions which reach 100,000 signatures are almost always debated. But we may decide not to put a petition forward for debate if the issue has already been debated recently or there’s a debate scheduled for the near future.
“If that’s the case, we’ll tell you how you can find out more about parliamentary debates on the issue raised by your petition. MPs might consider your petition for a debate before it reaches 100,000 signatures.
“We may contact you about the issue covered by your petition. For example, we sometimes invite people who create petitions to take part in a discussion with MPs or Government ministers, or to give evidence to a select committee.
“We may also write to other people or organisations to ask them about the issue raised by your petition.”
