Kamal Ahmed @kamalahmed1 RT @joelhillssky Election some way off, Labour may not win, price cap policy is vague BUT Centrica shares (3%) and SSE (2%) down today
Nice to see the PB Hodges still in headless chicken mode. Will any of the Hodges be going to the Conservative Party conference? Maybe you could visit one of the energy company stalls that are there. Make sure you don't trip over the tumbleweed in there though. Any chance of getting one of your ministers to visit one of them?
Nice to see the PB Hodges still in headless chicken mode. Will any of the Hodges be going to the Conservative Party conference? Maybe you could visit one of the energy company stalls that are there. Make sure you don't trip over the tumbleweed in there though. Any chance of getting one of your ministers to visit one of them?
Kamal Ahmed @kamalahmed1 RT @joelhillssky Election some way off, Labour may not win, price cap policy is vague BUT Centrica shares (3%) and SSE (2%) down today
There's scope for insider trading here
Centrica are now ex-dividend. In general, energy shares not more down than FTSE100.
Gerry - Wait there, are you sayiong that the energy companies will freeze the price themselves. Well further down the thread the PB Hodges are saying that a freeze would cause a blackout....get with the agreed line. Or does a energy company freeze not cause blackouts, but a government induced one does?
I agree with Jonathan that much of the right are over-reacting to the proposed energy price freeze. It is not that it is not a very bad idea - it is - and it's not that it won't have significant consequences for employment, investment and energy security - it will - but the right's response needs to take into account the politics of the situation. Ed's proposal - like a lot of what he said yesterday - will be attractive to a significant majority of the people who engage in politics only at a superficial level (a significant majority of the significant majority, then). If Ed's opponants scream that the sky will fall in, I think the majority of people would look from one side to the other and think "I think Ed's closer to the truth on this one". The right's response needs to be more measured and thoughtful, albeit withering. There is real danger in the right being seen to defend a painful status quo and the vested interests who are perceived to benefit from it.
The land grab idea has been introduced clumsily and is fraught with difficulty but could be made to work if implemented within sensible parameters. For example, if you were to allow local authorities to designate specific areas as being "high development demand areas" it would be reasonable for anybody who invests in land for development purposes within that area to do so on the basis that they have a limited time to implement their development and if they fail to do so the land could be compulsarily acquired. There would be a lot of devil in the detail - how do you take into account fluctuations in economic conditions, force majeure events etc, how would the compensation mechanism work to be fair to the landowner without inadvertently disincentivising development or incentivising speculation. But it would not be beyond the wit of man to solve those problems. It's quite radical but it is not something Conservatives should particularly fear.
Nice to see the PB Hodges still in headless chicken mode. Will any of the Hodges be going to the Conservative Party conference? Maybe you could visit one of the energy company stalls that are there. Make sure you don't trip over the tumbleweed in there though. Any chance of getting one of your ministers to visit one of them?
Nice to see the PB Hodges still in headless chicken mode. Will any of the Hodges be going to the Conservative Party conference? Maybe you could visit one of the energy company stalls that are there. Make sure you don't trip over the tumbleweed in there though. Any chance of getting one of your ministers to visit one of them?
"And on Monday lunchtime anyone feeling peckish could enjoy a free lunch and a discussion with Labour’s Shadow Employment Minister about youth aspiration, paid for by Kentucky Fried Chicken"....amazing.
Nice to see the PB Hodges still in headless chicken mode. Will any of the Hodges be going to the Conservative Party conference? Maybe you could visit one of the energy company stalls that are there. Make sure you don't trip over the tumbleweed in there though. Any chance of getting one of your ministers to visit one of them?
... don't need to say anything....
......love to get a picture of a minister sipping champers in one of them.....
RedRag1, just for you. Your lot are no better than the Tories. Now go and have a lie down.
"This weekend as Labour Party delegates gathered for their annual conference in Brighton there was no shortage of free food, drink and entertainment on offer. On Saturday night members – including a shimmying Harriet Harman – danced the night away at a ceilidh hosted by Scottish Power."
RedRag1, just for you. Your lot are no better than the Tories. Now go and have a lie down.
"This weekend as Labour Party delegates gathered for their annual conference in Brighton there was no shortage of free food, drink and entertainment on offer. On Saturday night members – including a shimmying Harriet Harman – danced the night away at a ceilidh hosted by Scottish Power."
Can't lie down, need to fend off the PB Hodge hordes on here. Obviously this shows that Labour are not being bought off by the energy companies, as if they were, they would have said they would introduce the freeze. Will be interesting to see if any of them turn up at next years event.
PS If it weren't for me, Tim, SO, etc the PB Hodges would be talking amongst themselves, and well, it would be just like ConHome without the Kippers.
RedRag1, just for you. Your lot are no better than the Tories. Now go and have a lie down.
"This weekend as Labour Party delegates gathered for their annual conference in Brighton there was no shortage of free food, drink and entertainment on offer. On Saturday night members – including a shimmying Harriet Harman – danced the night away at a ceilidh hosted by Scottish Power."
Can't lie down, need to fend off the PB Hodge hordes on here. Obviously this shows that Labour are not being bought off by the energy companies, as if they were, they would have said they would introduce the freeze. Will be interesting to see if any of them turn up at next years event.
I'm certain they will. Anyway, I'm off to ready the brazier for 12 O'clock.
RedRag1, just for you. Your lot are no better than the Tories. Now go and have a lie down.
"This weekend as Labour Party delegates gathered for their annual conference in Brighton there was no shortage of free food, drink and entertainment on offer. On Saturday night members – including a shimmying Harriet Harman – danced the night away at a ceilidh hosted by Scottish Power."
Can't lie down, need to fend off the PB Hodge hordes on here. Obviously this shows that Labour are not being bought off by the energy companies, as if they were, they would have said they would introduce the freeze. Will be interesting to see if any of them turn up at next years event.
I'm certain they will. Anyway, I'm off to ready the brazier for 12 O'clock.
Mr. Jonathan, I entirely agree that the energy market needs changing to help encourage more providers which would foster competition.
I don't see how Miliband's Communist Revelation is supposed to achieve that. "Come to Britain, where we have green taxes and threaten price freezes if you make a profit!"
It's also the act of a rancid hypocrite to inflict green charges which hike prices and then complain prices are too high. The Coalition also deserves some censure for not axing the aforementioned charges, but Miliband is the reason we have them in the first place.
Isn't that then the obvious response from the Tories next week then. The line about 'why haven't you done it already?' is an easy one to counter: Huhne, Davey - it's all them Lib Dems' fault.
Isn't that then the obvious response from the Tories next week then. The line about 'why haven't you done it already?' is an easy one to counter: Huhne, Davey - it's all them Lib Dems' fault.
Trouble is that doesn't match well with Dave's own green credentials, hug a husky or whatever that was, and the mini wind turbine old Pork likes to bring up every now and again ;-)
Financier - "Ed could have laid waste to the "Green Energy" tax, but does not want to upset the EU ..."
Not quite. Ed wouldn't want to upset the EU (hence his contortions when Cameron vetoed the treaty - not wanting to be seen to support more federalism but unwilling to say he'd have vetoed too), but on this one I'm pretty sure he's a true believer and would advocate much the same whether or not the EU existed.
Have any of the Labour Trolls, as they are slightly more intelligent than Militwunt, thought about the prospects of a Chinese economy stalling in the next three-quaters? Imagine the effect on retail energy prices if the BRICS stagger, the EU festers and Barry drags the US aimlessly about.
By May 2015 we could see oil (and it's Gas-equivilant) trading at $60/barrel. At the same time the Chinese will have reorganised; Brazil will {have|be preparing to elect a new President}; India will be introducing new market-reforms; Russia will be navel-gazing; and who really cares about Sarf' Afrika, hey?
So Militwunt may inherit artificially low energy prices and be committed (if only) to keeping them low as global energy prices rise. Re-tyred-Eds and their trolls: Never as bright as a candle....
Isn't that then the obvious response from the Tories next week then. The line about 'why haven't you done it already?' is an easy one to counter: Huhne, Davey - it's all them Lib Dems' fault.
Trouble is that doesn't match well with Dave's own green credentials, hug a husky or whatever that was, and the mini wind turbine old Pork likes to bring up every now and again ;-)
Yeah, that was all a long time ago pre-crash and -recession; the world's changed since. It wouldn't be too hard to acknowledge new realities and priorities.
I have to say Ed has gone up in my estimation. After all, any fool can screw up investment in our energy infrastructure when he's the relevant minister, but it takes a special kind of genius to repeat the trick as leader of the opposition.
Isn't that then the obvious response from the Tories next week then. The line about 'why haven't you done it already?' is an easy one to counter: Huhne, Davey - it's all them Lib Dems' fault.
Trouble is that doesn't match well with Dave's own green credentials, hug a husky or whatever that was, and the mini wind turbine old Pork likes to bring up every now and again ;-)
Yeah, that was all a long time ago pre-crash and -recession; the world's changed since. It wouldn't be too hard to acknowledge new realities and priorities.
"..David Cameron was dispirited to discover that, after years of modernisation, when people in opinion research were asked to describe a single image of the Conservative Party, it was a rich man standing outside a castle. The fundamental view of Tories hadn’t shifted at all. Yet while it may not be a Labour point alone, it is very definitely a Labour point. In the same research, the image of Labour was a lazy, fat man stretched out on a couch watching television.
The effort required to change this is monumental. Slacken off for a second and it reasserts itself. Ed Miliband and Ed Balls appear to believe that they can tinker with Labour’s position and still make a difference. This is quite obviously an error. A hugely single-minded attempt is required to suggest that Labour has learnt the lessons of the past and that it won’t do it again. Yesterday Mr Miliband elected not even to try. His speech was an extraordinary act of memory in which he recalled every word, but forgot why Labour lost the last election.
He hardly made an economic argument and devoted only a few lines to the question of the deficit. Talk of ending the “something for nothing” society, which formed an important part of his address two years ago, seems to have been dropped..."
EDF are owned the the French state? The French state has basically guareenteed their energy-workers' pensions by investing in the UK (IIRC from t'Economist). What happens when French engineers cut the inter-connector in response to Militwunt's raid on their pension-funds (cf Fireworkers' strike today)...?
Blackouts - ain't gonna happen. No company willing to sell to market of 60m people - ain't gonna happen.
Any more for any more?
Less of that common sense Bobajob, the PB Hodges will ride you out of town. Can you imagine the flight of customers if an energy company says they may have blackouts.
Financier - "Ed could have laid waste to the "Green Energy" tax, but does not want to upset the EU ..."
Not quite. Ed wouldn't want to upset the EU (hence his contortions when Cameron vetoed the treaty - not wanting to be seen to support more federalism but unwilling to say he'd have vetoed too), but on this one I'm pretty sure he's a true believer and would advocate much the same whether or not the EU existed.
Blackouts - ain't gonna happen. No company willing to sell to market of 60m people - ain't gonna happen.
Any more for any more?
Less of that common sense Bobajob, the PB Hodges will ride you out of town. Can you imagine the flight of customers if an energy company says they may have blackouts.
Aren't all the power companies connected to the same grid, so wouldn't brownouts effect the entire system as opposed to one company's customers?
"I cannot remember any time in the past 15 years when business groups and companies were so hostile to Labour. The attack on its latest policies from several large companies, including Centrica yesterday, were as unprecedented as they were spot on. Yet that is music to Ed Miliband’s ears: he doesn’t want and doesn’t think he needs their support. He wants to regulate them much more heavily, tax them more harshly and dictate to them who they can and cannot hire and how much they can pay them. His narrative is that he is standing up for the little guy against corporate power. It would be a great message if it were true.
Yet the policies announced yesterday will inflict massive havoc on the economy, give more powers to bureaucrats and ultimately hurt, directly or indirectly, many of the people Miliband wants to help. He is proposing, inter alia, a plan to cap energy prices and a house-building programme, two areas in need of a genuine shake-up.
He wants to cap gas and electricity prices for 20 months. Yet price controls have been tried thousands of times throughout history in hundreds of different markets and always fail."
Blackouts - ain't gonna happen. No company willing to sell to market of 60m people - ain't gonna happen.
Any more for any more?
Less of that common sense Bobajob, the PB Hodges will ride you out of town. Can you imagine the flight of customers if an energy company says they may have blackouts.
Aren't all the power companies connected to the same grid, so wouldn't brownouts effect the entire system as opposed to one company's customers?
"brownouts"....is that the latest Hodges spin line, if so I will need to add it to the Bingo.
"brownouts"....is that the latest Hodges spin line, if so I will need to add it to the Bingo.
Sorry I thought you had said brownouts. Still the question remains, I thought all of the companies were interconnected, and blackouts/brownouts (whatever) would not be limited to one company.
There was a moment when Blair was PM at PMQs when he was asked a question of a technical nature about tax. The answer revealed that he simply had no idea what the question meant and gave a stock answer.
Ed M has just opened himself to 18 months of hard questions about markets, economics, growth, deficits, etc. For his own sake he had better get some policies and try to understand them. Labour colleagues must now be terrified that he's going to make horrific gaffe after horrific gaffe when the heat gets turned up in this space. A life of Fabian wonkery does not prepare him to answer the money questions. But 'it's the economy stupid'.
And his wingman in this furnace is going to be Balls! You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
"The Labour leader believes public consent has frayed and is therefore calling for a new deal on regulation. But intervention reminiscent of 1970s-style price controls carries serious risks.
First, it sends a dangerous signal to investors about the predictability of policy. Second, it may run counter to Mr Miliband’s own promise to decarbonise Britain’s energy by 2030, a policy that means industry will require resources for investment. Third, based purely on existing investment needs, it raises the grim possibility of the lights going out.
As a leader, Mr Miliband took a step forward this week. But he is still too close to his soft-left comfort zone, and a fair way from the centre ground conquered so successfully by Tony Blair. His bet is that the public has moved left, but with a recovery, however fragile, now under way, it is a risky strategy. Mr Miliband said many times that “Britain can do better than this”. The same judgment might still be made of him."
What happens if you own a small house in one of those 'high development demand areas' and put in for planning permission to build an extension. However due to changed personal circumstances, you do not go ahead. Would that count? Would your garden to be able to be claimed?
The suggested rules would hammer the small developer, for whom the planning and financing process is very fraught as it is.
There are better ways of doing this. Supermarkets are a major hoarder of land in land banks - Tesco was a major player in this - and the land tends to be in high-value areas.
Make it so if a development is over a certain square footage - say under 280 m2 to include the small shops, but larger than an individual house and garage - then you have to pay a large fine, equivalent to (say) a tenth of the land value with planning permission, to the local council, if the planning lapses.
As you say above, there would have to be exclusions for when the lack of development is not down to the developer - councils can play silly beggars even after planning permission is granted, as many developers have found to their cost.
But in the case of the supermarkets' vast land banks, the solution may be something like Miliband is suggesting. In these cases the prime locations are kept undeveloped by the supermarkets to avoid their competitors getting them. However, his approach would not work as, in the majority of cases (AIUI), they never put planning permission forward. They own he land solely as an investment, and to stop other supermarkets using it.
"brownouts"....is that the latest Hodges spin line, if so I will need to add it to the Bingo.
Sorry I thought you had said brownouts. Still the question remains, I thought all of the companies were interconnected, and blackouts/brownouts (whatever) would not be limited to one company.
Exactly, so if one company announced there would be blackouts with them, I am sure their customers would see their arse. For a company to say it would be economic suicide.
Blackouts - ain't gonna happen. No company willing to sell to market of 60m people - ain't gonna happen.
Any more for any more?
It's not the price freeze that will directly cause blackouts, it's the reduction or suspension of investment in new power stations that might.
If effect Miliband has announced that the future of the energy market in the UK will not be resolved until 2017 at the earliest. Anyone thinking of investing in UK power generation is surely going to be very wary of making commitments to do so before then when they now know that there will likely be a) price freezes, b) a new regulator, c) companies may be broken up, and d) a substantial change in the amount of energy generated from renewables; all things Miliband has suggested will happen.
We needed the investment years ago, now we are likely going to see further delays.
"I cannot remember any time in the past 15 years when business groups and companies were so hostile to Labour. The attack on its latest policies from several large companies, including Centrica yesterday, were as unprecedented as they were spot on. Yet that is music to Ed Miliband’s ears: he doesn’t want and doesn’t think he needs their support. He wants to regulate them much more heavily, tax them more harshly and dictate to them who they can and cannot hire and how much they can pay them. His narrative is that he is standing up for the little guy against corporate power. It would be a great message if it were true.
Yet the policies announced yesterday will inflict massive havoc on the economy, give more powers to bureaucrats and ultimately hurt, directly or indirectly, many of the people Miliband wants to help. He is proposing, inter alia, a plan to cap energy prices and a house-building programme, two areas in need of a genuine shake-up.
He wants to cap gas and electricity prices for 20 months. Yet price controls have been tried thousands of times throughout history in hundreds of different markets and always fail."
RedRag1, just for you. Your lot are no better than the Tories. Now go and have a lie down.
"This weekend as Labour Party delegates gathered for their annual conference in Brighton there was no shortage of free food, drink and entertainment on offer. On Saturday night members – including a shimmying Harriet Harman – danced the night away at a ceilidh hosted by Scottish Power."
Can't lie down, need to fend off the PB Hodge hordes on here. Obviously this shows that Labour are not being bought off by the energy companies, as if they were, they would have said they would introduce the freeze. Will be interesting to see if any of them turn up at next years event.
I'm certain they will. Anyway, I'm off to ready the brazier for 12 O'clock.
It's important to understand the true extent of the damage Ed did yesterday. It's not just the state-imposed price freeze for 20 months; what guarantee is there that it wouldn't be extended? That's what tends to happen with state interference in pricing.
But even if that doesn't happen, what Ed has done is throw in, almost casually, massive uncertainty about the structure of the industry post-2017, if Labour form the next government. Some new regulator, and forced breaking-up of existing companies seems to be what he is proposing.
At a time when (largely due to 13 years of neglect under the last government), what we most urgently need is a huge investment in generating and distribution capacity, tipping a whole heap of uncertainly into the mix is more than just irresponsible, it is insane.
Who is going to invest billions if not only they run the risk of having to sell power at a loss, but also don't know the regulatory framework of even if they will have to sell their assets - at a knock-down price because it would be a forced sale?
The most frightening thing is that I have a horrible feeling that Ed really does think that power stations grow spontaneously out of the ground.
Exactly, so if one company announced there would be blackouts with them, I am sure their customers would see their arse. For a company to say it would be economic suicide.
My point is there is no such concept of having blackouts with an individual provider, they will all have them due to the interconnectivity of the network. It's not as if one company has a power plant that will only send electricity to their customers -- they are all part of the grid.
Without checking down the thread have we had the full house. I mean quotes given by the PB Hodges from The King, The Telegraph, The Sun, The Express, The Mail, The Spectator, The Times as justification of their statements of yesterdays speech being "toe curling", "car crash", surely it cannot get any worse" etc etc .
Next week it will all be in reverse and it will be the greatest speech ever since Camerons last greatest speech ever.....and guess what they will link to.
I am unsure whether the freeze is that big a deal for consumers.After all 120 pounds is even less than the proposed marriage tax and that`s given yearly.
But in one deft move,Miliband has shifted the terms of debate.`Cost of living` is the center-ground now and the Tories don`t seem prepared for it.
Perhaps we`ll hear more from them as to how they are going to reduce the cost of living and when they are going to lift the public sector pay freeze given that the economy is recovering.
Blackouts - ain't gonna happen. No company willing to sell to market of 60m people - ain't gonna happen.
Any more for any more?
Less of that common sense Bobajob, the PB Hodges will ride you out of town. Can you imagine the flight of customers if an energy company says they may have blackouts.
Aren't all the power companies connected to the same grid, so wouldn't brownouts effect the entire system as opposed to one company's customers?
It's worse than that. The grid is exceptionally vulnerable to power fluctuations, and keeping it going is a fine balancing act. It is also, incidentally, massively expensive to run and takes up a goodly proportion of all energy bills. Fortunately we do do it fairly well in the UK.
There are many cases of one small failure in the grid causing sub-nationwide blackouts. Take the 2003 Northeast blackout, which for some lasted two days. It was initially caused by a software fault that triggered a cascading failure. In just four hours, 256 power plants were knocked offline.
Plato, that's a good piece by the Fink and the line "His speech was an extraordinary act of memory in which he recalled every word, but forgot why Labour lost the last election" is pithy, but marred by being completely inaccurate. Miliband's speech yesterday demonstrates he knows full well why Labour lost the last election. Hence a speech that barley mentioned public finances, that was very focussed on the future and that was a direct appeal to the people to dare to dream of a less painful world.
I don't think many Conservatives have woken up to the potential threat Miliband's line poses to them - blatant populism combined with quite an effective line of attack (38/39 months of prices rising faster than wages is politically very damaging, particularly when combined with apparent largesse to the wealthy - nonsense or not, it resonates) is the best hope Labour have of winning the next election given the time and resources available to them. It's clever.
Miliband has also energised Labour activists, which will result in a marked contrast to the 2010 campaign.
The Conservatives need to develop the right line to counter Miliband's vision. That line needs to tackle head-on Miliband's post-apocalyptic description of Britain today, demonstrate that the Government has not been blind or indifferent to the pressures faced by people on low incomes, has taken steps to alleviate difficulty (eg raising the income tax threshold) and has a plan that involves more than just more pain for the masses. Then it needs to explain (again) the challenges posed by our public finances and the appalling legacy Labour left and make hay with the fact Labour seem intent on ignoring it - it can't simply be wished away.
They also need to tear into Miliband's legacy at DECC. Every price rise on his watch - he now owns. Every defence of profitability - he now owns. Every comment he has ever made about the importance of investment into the UK is a weapon waiting to be used against him.
@Patrick – “Ed M has just opened himself to 18 months of hard questions about markets, economics, growth, deficits, etc. For his own sake he had better get some policies and try to understand them.”
True enough - However, Ed was a Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change – If he failed to grasp the fundamentals of market forces whilst in charge – I see little chance of him mastering them now.
The same goes for home builders "do what we want or we'll confiscate your land"
It Mugabesque. I'm horrified.
There is rarely a political speech that frightens me - but yesterday's was one of them. I thought EdM was a fairly harmless numpty with no discernible leadership skills - now I think he's a dangerous numpty who could get his hands on the tiller.
If I hadn't joined the Tories a month ago - I'd have done it yesterday. He can't be allowed anywhere near Number 10.
It's important to understand the true extent of the damage Ed did yesterday. It's not just the state-imposed price freeze for 20 months; what guarantee is there that it wouldn't be extended? That's what tends to happen with state interference in pricing.
But even if that doesn't happen, what Ed has done is throw in, almost casually, massive uncertainty about the structure of the industry post-2017, if Labour form the next government. Some new regulator, and forced breaking-up of existing companies seems to be what he is proposing.
At a time when (largely due to 13 years of neglect under the last government), what we most urgently need is a huge investment in generating and distribution capacity, tipping a whole heap of uncertainly into the mix is more than just irresponsible, it is insane.
Who is going to invest billions if not only they run the risk of having to sell power at a loss, but also don't know the regulatory framework of even if they will have to sell their assets - at a knock-down price because it would be a forced sale?
The most frightening thing is that I have a horrible feeling that Ed really does think that power stations grow spontaneously out of the ground.
'At a time when (largely due to 13 years of neglect under the last government), what we most urgently need is a huge investment in generating and distribution capacity, tipping a whole heap of uncertainly into the mix is more than just irresponsible, it is insane.'
I'm sure the energy companies will now be rushing with their bids to replace the UK's aging Nuclear Power stations.
I am unsure whether the freeze is that big a deal for consumers.After all 120 pounds is even less than the proposed marriage tax and that`s given yearly.
But in one deft move,Miliband has shifted the terms of debate.`Cost of living` is the center-ground now and the Tories don`t seem prepared for it.
Median UK wage has stagnated since 2003, although for a time people managed to cope by borrowing beyond their means. The cost of living crisis seems to be all down to Labour.
Also you seem to have missed the increase in Personal Allowance from £6000 to £1000 that's occurring under the coallition. An extra £700 a year to basic rate taxpayers compared to Brown removing the 10p tax rate and increasing income tax on the very poorest workers.
I suspect that EdM's lurch to the left will be exploited to the hilt next week. I think Mr Fink's point was that Labour is hoping that by not mentioning the war - voters will forget it ever happened...
The correlation he outlined here about long memories is revealing:
"...Similar massacres occurred around the same time in many parts of Northern Europe, particularly in Germany. It was a response to the Black Death. The disastrous plague had, many decided, been the fault of the Jews. In roughly three quarters of the places in Northern Europe where Jews had settlements, there were attacks and burnings...
The care taken by the two academics allowed them to show that there is a link between these massacres and areas where the Nazi Party did well in the 1928 election. Essentially, the Nazis did much better in places where there had been burnings a full 600 years earlier than in places where there had not been. And attacks on synagogues in 1938 were also associated with towns where Jews were murdered those many centuries earlier...
The results are even more remarkable because Jews pretty much vanished from Germany in the 15th century and only returned in any number in the 19th. The only plausible explanation is the survival of deep-seated cultural attitudes, regardless of change and political development." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/article3878269.ece
Exactly, so if one company announced there would be blackouts with them, I am sure their customers would see their arse. For a company to say it would be economic suicide.
My point is there is no such concept of having blackouts with an individual provider, they will all have them due to the interconnectivity of the network. It's not as if one company has a power plant that will only send electricity to their customers -- they are all part of the grid.
Rob D - I realise that, however, which energy company would single handedly declare the blackouts and run the risk of a flight of customers. All the customer will see is "XYZ Power says they may run out of gas/electricity" and many will change supplier faster than you can say Ed is crap.
'They also need to tear into Miliband's legacy at DECC. Every price rise on his watch - he now owns. Every defence of profitability - he now owns. Every comment he has ever made about the importance of investment into the UK is a weapon waiting to be used against him.'
As in:
'Last week it emerged energy bills have almost doubled since 2000, turning up the heat on Britain’s already hard-pressed families.
Households last year spent an average of £1,339 on gas and electricity – 85 per cent more than the £710 at the turn of the century, research shows.
The figures – adjusted to 2012 prices to take inflation into account – show that gas bills went up by 119 per cent and electricity bills by 47 per cent between 2000 and last year.
Rob D - I realise that, however, which energy company would single handedly declare the blackouts and run the risk of a flight of customers. All the customer will see is "XYZ Power says they may run out of gas/electricity" and many will change supplier faster than you can say Ed is crap.
They would surely make it clear in any announcement that they are referring to the UK as a whole. I am sure (would hope!) their PR team would be competent enough to make that distinction.
Comments
We have concerns about generating capacity, and blackouts. Protecting against blackouts will cost us all. etc.
Or perhaps they should just ignore generating capacity, it is tomorrow's problem, not today's, and therefore doesn't count.
I offer this, without comment.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/inside-westminster-our-politicalconferences-have-turned-into-glorified-trade-fairs-8835522.html
The land grab idea has been introduced clumsily and is fraught with difficulty but could be made to work if implemented within sensible parameters. For example, if you were to allow local authorities to designate specific areas as being "high development demand areas" it would be reasonable for anybody who invests in land for development purposes within that area to do so on the basis that they have a limited time to implement their development and if they fail to do so the land could be compulsarily acquired. There would be a lot of devil in the detail - how do you take into account fluctuations in economic conditions, force majeure events etc, how would the compensation mechanism work to be fair to the landowner without inadvertently disincentivising development or incentivising speculation. But it would not be beyond the wit of man to solve those problems. It's quite radical but it is not something Conservatives should particularly fear.
... don't need to say anything....
Your lot are no better than the Tories. Now go and have a lie down.
"This weekend as Labour Party delegates gathered for their annual conference in Brighton there was no shortage of free food, drink and entertainment on offer. On Saturday night members – including a shimmying Harriet Harman – danced the night away at a ceilidh hosted by Scottish Power."
PS If it weren't for me, Tim, SO, etc the PB Hodges would be talking amongst themselves, and well, it would be just like ConHome without the Kippers.
Anyway, I'm off to ready the brazier for 12 O'clock.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2431236/DAMIAN-MCBRIDE-The-day-I-woke-bed-naked-Ed-Balls.html
Not quite. Ed wouldn't want to upset the EU (hence his contortions when Cameron vetoed the treaty - not wanting to be seen to support more federalism but unwilling to say he'd have vetoed too), but on this one I'm pretty sure he's a true believer and would advocate much the same whether or not the EU existed.
By May 2015 we could see oil (and it's Gas-equivilant) trading at $60/barrel. At the same time the Chinese will have reorganised; Brazil will {have|be preparing to elect a new President}; India will be introducing new market-reforms; Russia will be navel-gazing; and who really cares about Sarf' Afrika, hey?
So Militwunt may inherit artificially low energy prices and be committed (if only) to keeping them low as global energy prices rise. Re-tyred-Eds and their trolls: Never as bright as a candle....
"..David Cameron was dispirited to discover that, after years of modernisation, when people in opinion research were asked to describe a single image of the Conservative Party, it was a rich man standing outside a castle. The fundamental view of Tories hadn’t shifted at all. Yet while it may not be a Labour point alone, it is very definitely a Labour point. In the same research, the image of Labour was a lazy, fat man stretched out on a couch watching television.
The effort required to change this is monumental. Slacken off for a second and it reasserts itself. Ed Miliband and Ed Balls appear to believe that they can tinker with Labour’s position and still make a difference. This is quite obviously an error. A hugely single-minded attempt is required to suggest that Labour has learnt the lessons of the past and that it won’t do it again. Yesterday Mr Miliband elected not even to try. His speech was an extraordinary act of memory in which he recalled every word, but forgot why Labour lost the last election.
He hardly made an economic argument and devoted only a few lines to the question of the deficit. Talk of ending the “something for nothing” society, which formed an important part of his address two years ago, seems to have been dropped..."
Get with it, in the land of the politically obsessed, the one eyed man is king.
:militwunt-self-describing:
No company willing to sell to market of 60m people - ain't gonna happen.
Any more for any more?
RT @statisticsONS: Most of the rise in #women working over last 40 years took place before 1991: bit.ly/1akAcCG #ons
Yet the policies announced yesterday will inflict massive havoc on the economy, give more powers to bureaucrats and ultimately hurt, directly or indirectly, many of the people Miliband wants to help. He is proposing, inter alia, a plan to cap energy prices and a house-building programme, two areas in need of a genuine shake-up.
He wants to cap gas and electricity prices for 20 months. Yet price controls have been tried thousands of times throughout history in hundreds of different markets and always fail."
http://www.cityam.com/article/1380069485/miliband-s-lurch-left-recipe-disaster
This policy is not a big deal, it's already happening.
Ed M has just opened himself to 18 months of hard questions about markets, economics, growth, deficits, etc. For his own sake he had better get some policies and try to understand them. Labour colleagues must now be terrified that he's going to make horrific gaffe after horrific gaffe when the heat gets turned up in this space. A life of Fabian wonkery does not prepare him to answer the money questions. But 'it's the economy stupid'.
And his wingman in this furnace is going to be Balls! You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5634cce8-251a-11e3-bcf7-00144feab7de.html#axzz2fngRgkfA
"The Labour leader believes public consent has frayed and is therefore calling for a new deal on regulation. But intervention reminiscent of 1970s-style price controls carries serious risks.
First, it sends a dangerous signal to investors about the predictability of policy. Second, it may run counter to Mr Miliband’s own promise to decarbonise Britain’s energy by 2030, a policy that means industry will require resources for investment. Third, based purely on existing investment needs, it raises the grim possibility of the lights going out.
As a leader, Mr Miliband took a step forward this week. But he is still too close to his soft-left comfort zone, and a fair way from the centre ground conquered so successfully by Tony Blair. His bet is that the public has moved left, but with a recovery, however fragile, now under way, it is a risky strategy. Mr Miliband said many times that “Britain can do better than this”. The same judgment might still be made of him."
The suggested rules would hammer the small developer, for whom the planning and financing process is very fraught as it is.
There are better ways of doing this. Supermarkets are a major hoarder of land in land banks - Tesco was a major player in this - and the land tends to be in high-value areas.
Make it so if a development is over a certain square footage - say under 280 m2 to include the small shops, but larger than an individual house and garage - then you have to pay a large fine, equivalent to (say) a tenth of the land value with planning permission, to the local council, if the planning lapses.
As you say above, there would have to be exclusions for when the lack of development is not down to the developer - councils can play silly beggars even after planning permission is granted, as many developers have found to their cost.
But in the case of the supermarkets' vast land banks, the solution may be something like Miliband is suggesting. In these cases the prime locations are kept undeveloped by the supermarkets to avoid their competitors getting them. However, his approach would not work as, in the majority of cases (AIUI), they never put planning permission forward. They own he land solely as an investment, and to stop other supermarkets using it.
So Miliband's solution wouldn't even stop that.
If effect Miliband has announced that the future of the energy market in the UK will not be resolved until 2017 at the earliest. Anyone thinking of investing in UK power generation is surely going to be very wary of making commitments to do so before then when they now know that there will likely be a) price freezes, b) a new regulator, c) companies may be broken up, and d) a substantial change in the amount of energy generated from renewables; all things Miliband has suggested will happen.
We needed the investment years ago, now we are likely going to see further delays.
In the spirit of the seventies timewarp of Labour, this may get you in the mood:
http://vimeo.com/m/50653545
But even if that doesn't happen, what Ed has done is throw in, almost casually, massive uncertainty about the structure of the industry post-2017, if Labour form the next government. Some new regulator, and forced breaking-up of existing companies seems to be what he is proposing.
At a time when (largely due to 13 years of neglect under the last government), what we most urgently need is a huge investment in generating and distribution capacity, tipping a whole heap of uncertainly into the mix is more than just irresponsible, it is insane.
Who is going to invest billions if not only they run the risk of having to sell power at a loss, but also don't know the regulatory framework of even if they will have to sell their assets - at a knock-down price because it would be a forced sale?
The most frightening thing is that I have a horrible feeling that Ed really does think that power stations grow spontaneously out of the ground.
Next week it will all be in reverse and it will be the greatest speech ever since Camerons last greatest speech ever.....and guess what they will link to.
But in one deft move,Miliband has shifted the terms of debate.`Cost of living` is the center-ground now and the Tories don`t seem prepared for it.
Perhaps we`ll hear more from them as to how they are going to reduce the cost of living and when they are going to lift the public sector pay freeze given that the economy is recovering.
There are many cases of one small failure in the grid causing sub-nationwide blackouts. Take the 2003 Northeast blackout, which for some lasted two days. It was initially caused by a software fault that triggered a cascading failure. In just four hours, 256 power plants were knocked offline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_blackout_of_2003
Energy networks are particularly prone to cascading failures of this sort:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_failure#Cascading_failure_in_power_transmission
I don't think many Conservatives have woken up to the potential threat Miliband's line poses to them - blatant populism combined with quite an effective line of attack (38/39 months of prices rising faster than wages is politically very damaging, particularly when combined with apparent largesse to the wealthy - nonsense or not, it resonates) is the best hope Labour have of winning the next election given the time and resources available to them. It's clever.
Miliband has also energised Labour activists, which will result in a marked contrast to the 2010 campaign.
The Conservatives need to develop the right line to counter Miliband's vision. That line needs to tackle head-on Miliband's post-apocalyptic description of Britain today, demonstrate that the Government has not been blind or indifferent to the pressures faced by people on low incomes, has taken steps to alleviate difficulty (eg raising the income tax threshold) and has a plan that involves more than just more pain for the masses. Then it needs to explain (again) the challenges posed by our public finances and the appalling legacy Labour left and make hay with the fact Labour seem intent on ignoring it - it can't simply be wished away.
They also need to tear into Miliband's legacy at DECC. Every price rise on his watch - he now owns. Every defence of profitability - he now owns. Every comment he has ever made about the importance of investment into the UK is a weapon waiting to be used against him.
True enough - However, Ed was a Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change – If he failed to grasp the fundamentals of market forces whilst in charge – I see little chance of him mastering them now.
The Topics affecting the country are:
Economy : 64 (+2)
Immigration: 55(+4)
Health: 28 (-4)
Welfare benefits: 27(0)
Housing: 19(+3)
Topics affecting you and your family:
Economy: 53 (+3)
Health: 31 (-3)
Pensions: 29(+3)
Tax: 20(+1)
Immigration: 17 (+1)
It Mugabesque. I'm horrified.
There is rarely a political speech that frightens me - but yesterday's was one of them. I thought EdM was a fairly harmless numpty with no discernible leadership skills - now I think he's a dangerous numpty who could get his hands on the tiller.
If I hadn't joined the Tories a month ago - I'd have done it yesterday. He can't be allowed anywhere near Number 10.
'At a time when (largely due to 13 years of neglect under the last government), what we most urgently need is a huge investment in generating and distribution capacity, tipping a whole heap of uncertainly into the mix is more than just irresponsible, it is insane.'
I'm sure the energy companies will now be rushing with their bids to replace the UK's aging Nuclear Power stations.
Median UK wage has stagnated since 2003, although for a time people managed to cope by borrowing beyond their means. The cost of living crisis seems to be all down to Labour.
Also you seem to have missed the increase in Personal Allowance from £6000 to £1000 that's occurring under the coallition. An extra £700 a year to basic rate taxpayers compared to Brown removing the 10p tax rate and increasing income tax on the very poorest workers.
Any repeat of a comment like that will lead to stronger action.
Redrag/Fluffy- Your conversation is now closed.
I suspect that EdM's lurch to the left will be exploited to the hilt next week. I think Mr Fink's point was that Labour is hoping that by not mentioning the war - voters will forget it ever happened...
The correlation he outlined here about long memories is revealing:
"...Similar massacres occurred around the same time in many parts of Northern Europe, particularly in Germany. It was a response to the Black Death. The disastrous plague had, many decided, been the fault of the Jews. In roughly three quarters of the places in Northern Europe where Jews had settlements, there were attacks and burnings...
The care taken by the two academics allowed them to show that there is a link between these massacres and areas where the Nazi Party did well in the 1928 election. Essentially, the Nazis did much better in places where there had been burnings a full 600 years earlier than in places where there had not been. And attacks on synagogues in 1938 were also associated with towns where Jews were murdered those many centuries earlier...
The results are even more remarkable because Jews pretty much vanished from Germany in the 15th century and only returned in any number in the 19th. The only plausible explanation is the survival of deep-seated cultural attitudes, regardless of change and political development." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/article3878269.ece
'They also need to tear into Miliband's legacy at DECC. Every price rise on his watch - he now owns. Every defence of profitability - he now owns. Every comment he has ever made about the importance of investment into the UK is a weapon waiting to be used against him.'
As in:
'Last week it emerged energy bills have almost doubled since 2000, turning up the heat on Britain’s already hard-pressed families.
Households last year spent an average of £1,339 on gas and electricity – 85 per cent more than the £710 at the turn of the century, research shows.
The figures – adjusted to 2012 prices to take inflation into account – show that gas bills went up by 119 per cent and electricity bills by 47 per cent between 2000 and last year.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2430497/Labour-conference-2013-Ed-Miliband-speech-claims-Britain-better.html#ixzz2ftVlkPFD
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook