Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Haggis Hunt is now on!

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Profit tax for power firms that snub fuel poverty fund



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 03 March 2008
POWER companies could be threatened with a profits tax if they refuse to give back some of their earnings to subsidise fuel-poverty schemes.
ScottishPower bosses are to meet ministers and Treasury officials this week to discuss contributions to a fuel-poverty fund, plans for which are being drawn up by the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, for his 12 March Budget.

Mr Darling believes the scheme is vital to help 4.5 million hard-up pensioners and families facing difficulty paying their bills following 15 per cent-plus price rises.

Mr Darling's deputy, Yvette Cooper, energy minister Malcolm Wicks and officials from 10 and 11 Downing Street are meeting the heads of all the big energy companies in a bid to raise cash for the fund through a voluntary levy.

ScottishPower indicated it was sympathetic to the proposal, telling The Scotsman: "We are committed to working with the government to alleviate fuel poverty."

Treasury chief secretary Ms Cooper, Mr Wicks and officials have already met Scottish and Southern Energy, the UK's second-largest power provider, and Npower, the fourth-biggest, in recent days. This week, they will meet ScottishPower, Centrica (the owner of British Gas), E.On and EDF Energy.

Although Mr Darling is not currently proposing a second windfall tax on power-company profits, it does remain an option of last resort, with many Labour MPs supporting the idea.

But the Chancellor said he hoped companies would be prepared to assist the less well-off as their profits had increased and prices had risen by more than 10 per cent.

ScottishPower's parent company, Iberdrola, made £565 million in the final three months of last year but the firm still announced a 15 per cent price rise, making its average bill £1,100 a year for a household to which it supplies gas and electricity.

British Gas bills have gone up 15 per cent, EDF 11 per cent and Eon and Npower 16 per cent. As a result of the price rises, the number of people suffering fuel poverty – defined as spending more than 10 per cent of their disposable income on energy – has risen from four million last year to 4.5 million.

Mr Darling's proposal would be aimed at helping those in most difficulty to pay soaring gas and electricity household bills.

Ministers are understood to be angry that it is the government, not utility companies, which are being blamed for the rises.

The government is under pressure from Labour MPs, unions and campaign groups to tackle the "obscene" power-utility profits.

Some Labour MPs have tabled an amendment to the Energy Bill to give the government the power to force power companies to run lower-priced "social tariffs" for the less well-off.

Tory shadow secretary of state for business, enterprise and regulatory reform, Alan Duncan said: "Lynch mob objections can win headlines and then a few years later the lights go out. Prices must reflect global markets, and we are far more competitive than anyone else in Europe. Beware of politicians seeking cheap headlines."

But Allan Asher, of Energywatch, said: "They have left it far too late. Companies have been abusing consumers for too long while the government stuck its head in the sand."

The full article contains 547 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 03 March 2008 11:01 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Fuel prices
 
1

J J MAROONER,

03/03/2008 00:27:46
Put them back into "public ownership", this is a service that should be run by the Government for the people, not for the benefit of greedy shareholders.- Thatcherism is dead even Blairs version of it
2

Guga II,

Rockall 03/03/2008 02:07:32
This is typical of the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party. They are trying to divert attention away from the massive tax take of Maggie Broon and his Darling, especially on fuel, and throw the blame entirely on some of their business buddies for making "obscene" profits.

Thatcherism is dead, but Maggie Broon won't lie down. I wonder how many members of the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party are shareholders in these same utility companies?

If Broon was in the slightest bit honest, he would cut the tax on fuel, including their doubly whammy of VAT on top of the tax. Broon and his New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party don't give a damn about ordinary people or how the high cost of fuel affects them.
3

Huistean baxter,

canada. 03/03/2008 03:31:42
Any taxes imposed by government on fuel companies
is just passed on to consumers. Can't win.
4

Pilrig.,

Livingston 03/03/2008 06:00:59
Yep, privatisation of public utilties, hasn't it been a boon for the ordinary public ? Aye, we were told competition would keep the prices doon !
Tell Sid to eff off.
5

Pilrig.,

Livingston 03/03/2008 06:06:43
"Darling believes the scheme is vital to help 4.5 million hard-pressed pensioners"
"hard-pressed pensioners" ? surely there can't be such a thing after a decade of Nu Lab economics ? Oh, I forgot about Broon's raid on private pensions !
He's all heart !
6

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 03/03/2008 06:35:39
Reverse fuel tariffs: cheap fuel for first units so as families have a bare minimum, then increasing costs as consumption becomes excessive. Thus the rich and wasters subsidise the basic consumer. QED.
7

Yamfudkas,

Awa Doon in Gorgie 03/03/2008 07:04:09
This is all great. Lets tax the power companies. What about the obscene profits made by the banks - far in excess of anything the utilities coin in. £6 billion or something the Royal made last year - through lending money to business who then pass the costs onto the consumer etc etc. Oh, and wee Jessies kitchen loan....
8

Boggle fey the Bog,

03/03/2008 07:09:29
It may help if we had a level 'playing field'.
In Scotland we pay more for electricity, by as much as 3.5p per unit (over 30% more), than our dearly beloved cousins in England! (Scotland subsidising England, yet again!!!)

It would also help if, the energy companies, reduced the price per KWh for people on 'Pre-Pay Schemes'.

Why are people who 'pay before they use' penalised by having the dearest energy charges in the country!!
Whatever happened to the 'Discount for Cash' idea?

No I'm afraid the Energy companies are only paying 'lip service' to the notion of reducing 'fuel poverty', as at the moment, those least able to pay, mostly those on 'Pre-Payment' schemes, are penalised by them, for being poor.

The government still can not explain why they have allowed Energy companies to more than double the price of domestic fuel in the past two years, when the actual 'raw material' cost has only increased by 38%.
(I speak from experience here, as neither Maggie Broon, nor John McFall has replied to the question I asked them about the above.I E-mailed them both about a month ago.)

Obscene profits, allowed by an obscene government!
9

Marvin the Martian,

03/03/2008 07:14:36
Shuggie and Kylie to get free heating paid for by writing new laws that force the companies to pay for it.

First rule of business is to externalise any costs so that is your middle class household bill going up to pay for this.

The poverty trap is too compelling in the UK these days. If you earn 20k or less you'd be as well becoming Shuggie or Kylie than pay 60% taxes/enforced contributions to private co.s to keep them in the manner they have become accustomed.
10

Citylocal Fife,

Citylocal Fife News 03/03/2008 07:42:24
I agree with some of the previous posters who have exposed Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling for what they are. The power companies do not operate a monopoly, unlike Westminster, who with one face moan about private companies increasing prices, and with the other they increase prices by imposing huge taxes on the consumer.

Now they want to tax the companies further, which will only result in the tax being passed on to the consumer. It's rather like the headline (and money) grabbing wheeze, whereby they fine the insurance companies, which results in premiums being increased to make up the deficit, which then results in lots of extra VAT for the chancellor.

Do they really think we are so gullible? Roll on the next election, when they'll get that question answered.


Yours etc


Angus Whitton
11

School Inspector,

03/03/2008 08:17:15
The true colours of the Armani suited socialilists running the country is coming out - change Capital Gains tax, chase all the wealth creators away, nationalise a bank or two and tax anyone that is manking money from a privitised company that they have been happy with for the past 12 years. Alastair / Alex ..... just get the Heatlh and Education systems running properly; it would make a nice change!
12

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 03/03/2008 08:19:19
I dont hear Darling offering to reduce the tax on electricity or to drop the obscene subsidies to the wind industry which are also driving the cost of electricity up.
13

thinking,

Scotland 03/03/2008 08:22:09
I don't agree with essential utilities being run as a commercial business, however, I remember why it was done. Unions had a strangle hold at the time and many workers did not give value for money. Near where I lived we would see utility workers stop for extended breaks shortly after starting work and frequently during the day. Also, as now, there was little accountability and costs were kept high by poor control over expenditure. Labout governement did nothing about it, if the Tories tried there were strikes
I think they should be nationalised and externally audited. Managers and Union leaders should be held ACCOUNTABLE for how they are run.
14

danielrober,

03/03/2008 08:40:11
Families and old people pay a huge percentage of their income on fuel bills. It really is a growing scandel.
15

11+failed,

the pans 03/03/2008 08:50:49
Yep, tax the utilities give free fuel to the 4m in fuel poverty. Who pays for all this? All the other customers who are already being taxed to the breadline by the New Labour mafia.
16

Dissector,

Stirling 03/03/2008 09:06:58
A "Voluntary" contribution ! - This Govt believes that, as companies can't vote, then they are easy targets for tax hikes. As ever,little Darlin' fails the most basic of intelligence tests - virtually every pension fund - public and private sector - will suffer as the income received by those funds from the energy companies will fall and that will hurt the growing number of hard-up retired people.What a success !!
17

vorlic,

edinburgh 03/03/2008 09:18:24
these conpanies should be investigated for running a cartel.the less well off have an option to eat or stay warm.why is this in one off the richest countries in the world. stop wasting millions or billions on wars that nobody wants.
18

Scotch man,

who ordered to take face skin pictures 03/03/2008 10:28:48
who ordered to take face skin pictures in Tennouji Platform.

Who took my face skin pictures many times in Tennouji Platform.

Please don't break my family(cousin).
19

Scotch man,

03/03/2008 10:29:50
Who was running the house truly?
20

Linda,

Edinburgh 03/03/2008 11:10:15
Darling has gained an additional £3 billion athis year from higher North Sea oil prices.
Yet he is going increase taxation for the very poorest from 10% to 20% next month.

Also his Labour colleagues in Westminster are acting like kids towards Scottish government by trying to block local income tax which is supported by the elected majority of MSPs.
21

Neil,

Glasgow 03/03/2008 12:06:19
Darling knows perfectly well that fuel, poverty is caused, quite deliberately, by the anti-nuclear policy his party has followed for decades He knows we could more than halve electricity costs if the government believed in a free market in electricity production since nuclear cost half what conventional power does & 1/4 of windmills.

This is an attempt by government to shuck off responsibility for the needless expense on the producers rather than the government parasites.
22

Galasbest,

Edinburgh 03/03/2008 12:36:12
Of all the above comments only #14 makes any sense. The rest are all "greetin" faces with their own axe to grind. As for #14 although right we have solved the original problem but are now faced with a new one. "What do we do now"
23

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 03/03/2008 13:39:34
Only #7 is correct: look at your fuel bills: the more you use the cheaper it becomes! Imagine if that was the case with booze!

The sane way is to provide cheap fuel for essential warmth and light, and then heavily penalise excessive consumption. The second can subsisise the first. The suppliers need not be involved other than to administer the scheme. No more frozen old ladies!
24

Jimmy the Pie,

03/03/2008 14:14:17
More empty rhetoric from New Labour Sleaze and Corruption.
Panic is setting in as they see they're going to get a hammering in the next UK elections, see Scotland going their own way. Looks like their gravy train is heading for a big crash
25

Sedov,

Barnsley 03/03/2008 14:14:22
#1 JJ - Totally agree- but I would add - with workers control.
26

John Blackley,

Winter Garden, FL 03/03/2008 14:54:02
Ah, there it is! Windfall taxes (as a 'last resort option', indeed!) have raised their entirely predictable little heads.

On the one hand, it's nice to have predictability in government. On the other, it's depressing that what's predictable are the same, old, tired ideas.

Now, tell me again how much it's costing us to bail out Northern Rock customers? Uh-huh. And how many people in the UK can't afford to heat their homes? Uh-huh. And how many times has this government been elected?
27

The Strategist,

03/03/2008 15:09:42
Classic Labour tokenism. They were told ten years ago that the cost of energy would rise dramatically because of the inevitable increase in oil and gas prices.

Their answer was to increase petroleum tax on the N Sea and increase fuel tax and despite the promise that they would they did not use any of that cash to increase R&D into alternative energy or fuels.



28

Tris,

Dundee 03/03/2008 15:32:48


I wonder if Wendy's worried about vulnerable 2 year olds living in fuel poverty.... eh?

Do you think maybe Darling has heard that 25,000 UK-wide die of the cold every year, and with a 15%+ hike in fuel costs and a 2% increase in pension this likely to increase?

Has he maybe had a wee tinge on conscience?

Ok .... don't shout at me .... It was a joke.....

Sheesh..... no sense of humour.
29

Geomac 1,

Kinross 03/03/2008 15:44:29
Not content with their ruination of public services, now the chancellor is setting about destroying private enterprise - I despair.
I am aware that the word PROFIT raises the hackles of socialists the world over but we have all seen that it does not work - e.g. Russia and China. Profit is not longer a bad word in these two countries - for good reason.
When this storm is analysed, what we see is that power companies are making a profit of around £50 per household - hardly enough to invest in the future - like new power stations, storage systems etc.
So we have the goverment beating the utility companies around the head but also trying to persude them to invest for the future - sorry Ally and Gordie, social failures are your problems to solve and not private industry - on which the future of the UK depends. No industry, no growth and no massive state funded pensions for MPs!
30

Geomac 1,

Kinross 03/03/2008 15:47:16
OOps - I forgot to mention that the government takes stupendous amounts of money from energy companies already - Corporation tax, VAT, petroleum revenue tax,etc. Surely these taxes are for use by govrement to fight poverty - rrather than to be used to line their owb personal pockets and waste it by throwing it at inefficient and unreformed public services
31

Tris,

03/03/2008 15:53:40


Tut tut, Geomac, you know as well as I do that NO MATTER what happens there will always be massive state funded pensions for MPs.

It's true though, that the profits of the power companies are not huge. It was the percentage rise in profits that was huge, and quite misleading.

Now the banks? Another matter altogether. Perhaps some of the billions they make in profit could be used to start an insurace fund for the likes of Northern Crock, so that next time the money doesn't have to come out of our pockets.

I'm not sure why you're accusing Broon and Sweety Pie of being socialists. These two could out Tory the Tories. Socialism is a BAD word to them.
32

Geomac 1,

Kinross 03/03/2008 15:56:32
Hey Tris - how about a windfall tax on MPs expenses?? Hmmm - I'd settle for any tax on MPs expenses!!
33

Tris,

03/03/2008 16:00:23
Sounds like a plan Geomac. About 5% should nett us enough to run the country for a year!
34

Western Gael,

03/03/2008 16:08:17
If you think National Health Service is poor value for money, wait until Darling gives us National Power Service!
35

Jimmy the Pie,

03/03/2008 16:39:32
Who said in 1997

"Remember, you are not here to enjoy the trappings of power, but to do a job and to uphold the highest standards in public life, we must be purer than pure" ????

Lies, lies and more lies.
36

subrosa,

03/03/2008 18:15:59
I'm a pensioner and live in a 3 bed house. Part of the house is 1840s although it is double glazed and has the correct loft insulation (for which I had to pay). By my calculation my gas and electric bills will be 23% of my income this year. Then of course there's the council tax etc.

I'm being forced out of the home I've lived in for 25 years. Have never claimed any benefits and worked for over 40 years.

Just a warning to you younger ones - work doesn't pay.
37

williamx,

canada 03/03/2008 18:45:30
Each Province in Canada owns the electrical utilities.
Each US State below the border uses private enterprise.
UK uses inefficient private enterprise which lacks competition.
Result
Canadian Provinces ave cost to consumer = 7c per KwH
US State ave cost to consumer = 12c per KwH
UK price per KwH = 14p =28c per KwH
38

williamx,

canada 03/03/2008 18:52:29
Check the cost of gas and the efficiency of the gas apparatus.
For example, my nat gas costs 1300 cents per gigajoule and my hot water tank has a stated efficiency of 55% on the jacket.
A gigajoule = 277 Kw
An electric water heater has 98% efficiency.
Therefore it costs me considerably less to heat water with electricity than with natural gas.
The gas companies do not publish this info.
For you poor sods in the UK your high electricity costs mean it is cheaper to heat with nat gas or oil. You must be the only place in the world where this reversal is operating>
39

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 03/03/2008 19:15:32
On the subject of electricity bills, I have a prepaid Scottish Power meter. They sent me a bill for £8 as their meter reader arrived when I was at work - doh.

Having tried to phone their 0845 number before I refuse.

Anyway, I recieved a bill from them for £500 odd of electricity consumed between meter readings and £500 odd credited by pre-paid.

The VAT they added to the bill was on the total consumption. I e-mailed them to inform them that I had already paid the VAT on the cards I had purchased and that the VAT should only be payable on the £8.

40 pence as against the £27 they were adding to the bill.

They never got back to me but keep sending bills. Remarkably the £8 doubled to £16 without a price hike or meter reader. How many people out there do not do their sums and just pay up on demand?

Perhaps the Broon Toon could spend a bit of their time looking into the billing before adding more taxes.
40

Sambo,

The deep south 03/03/2008 20:24:42
What a darling idea. Why doesn't he help the pensioners by indexing their pensions to the annual cost of living. Something his predecessor failed to do.
41

Saoghal Beag,

03/03/2008 20:29:21
rules i agree and scottish and southern already offer this, it's called a social tarriff, but you are right. If someone wants to have a tele half the size of a cinema screen in a living room 5m by 10m, and leave that tele on permanent standby when not playing the radio through it, then they should be paying a premium for their excessive consumption.

now how much nuclear does SSE have, lets think? which uk company has the highest percentage renewable generation? Nuclear the bankrupt option of blinkered engineers who want to marvel at their creation and ignore all the externalities.

jock go phone energywatch, they will gladly give a black mark to SP and sort it out for you.
42

S MacLeod,

Skye 03/03/2008 21:37:01
SSE has no other interest in Scotland other than damaging it, this seems to be also true for various councils.
43

John Blackley,

Winter Garden, FL 03/03/2008 21:43:17
#38 williamx said, "Each US State below the border uses private enterprise."

Not completely correct, williamx. There are states who own at least part of their utility companies. Nevertheless I agree with the thrust of your comment.
44

RightTurn,

Aberdeen 03/03/2008 23:41:11
#1

"Put them back into "public ownership", this is a service that should be run by the Government for the people, not for the benefit of greedy shareholders".

Public ownership is a complete misnower. Public ownership merely means more control by politicians and the government. It seems utterly perplexing at a time when trust in politicians is at its lowest, that 'the people' demand 'public ownership'.

Prices too high for gas or elecricity - then switch. You couldn't do that when they were controlled by the government.
45

RightTurn,

03/03/2008 23:41:42
Correction - Misnomer
46

grannie,

Glasgow 04/03/2008 18:34:59
Like Subrosa I am a pensioner who worked. I have my state pension and a small works pension. There are so many things they tell me I can get free if I am over 60 (now 73). However when I try to claim these I am asked what benefits I receive and when I say non I am then told Oh!! You can only get these if you are on benefits. By the time all these folks, most of whom never worked (invalidity benefit), get everything free they are better off than the rest of us.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.