[Finance] Don't Pay - Energy Bill Strike Movement

[A mex eyecan]

The plan is cancel the DD, put the money aside and pay what you owe after a couple of months. You'd not get a black mark on your credit score.

beg to differ

 

[A mex eyecan]

I don't like how much food is costing in the supermarket now.

I'm not going to pay for my trolley load any more. Perhaps we should start a movement.

well you could push the trolley faster, that should get the movement you seek

 

[golddene]

you should move on and understand this crisis streatches across europe and the world. read whats happening elsewhere with restrictions, rationing, prices rising.

Move on ? You were the one questioning nationalisation, my point is the exorbitant profiteering by energy companies would be far better served in the hands of the people/ state, rather than in the pockets of the super rich and foreign governments etc. Who now own all the energy generators and suppliers. The whole privatisation of all our utilities, railways, Royal Mail, British telecom etc etc was a con feeding on private investors short term greed and ultimately ending up as privately owned conglomerates feasting on the public who have no choice but to pay for and add to the wealth of the few. If that makes me some sort of communist in your eyes then so be it. Rather that than have the outlook of you and your political leanings.

 

[Weststander]

Move on ? You were the one questioning nationalisation, my point is the exorbitant profiteering by energy companies would be far better served in the hands of the people/ state, rather than in the pockets of the super rich and foreign governments etc. Who now own all the energy generators and suppliers. The whole privatisation of all our utilities, railways, Royal Mail, British telecom etc etc was a con feeding on private investors short term greed and ultimately ending up as privately owned conglomerates feasting on the public who have no choice but to pay for and add to the wealth of the few. If that makes me some sort of communist in your eyes then so be it. Rather that than have the outlook of you and your political leanings.

I’m not rigidly ideological either way on privatisation. I think we should assess each sector. Some examples, imho:

Railways - I think it’s a nonsense that in the South East we have Southern, SE, Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Network Rail. It’s not a genuine market that’s led to lower rail fares, far from it. But the relatively low dividends paid out would make bugger all difference to rail fares, if it was all nationalised, again. In reality Westminster subsides UK railways by £10b’s a year including infrastructure. One entity makes sense, I’m not bothered if it’s private or public. British Rail wasn’t good, always in the news itself for strikes, leaves on the line, awful slam door trains, angry commuters.

Water - again, one national entity makes sense, if state owned it would end lucrative dividends, lowering bills to an extent.

Rolls Royce, BA, BT … it was quite right that they were taken into private ownership. Successful ever since, no longer requiring subsidies for incompetence.

Gas and elec suppliers, Centrica, etc … I’m open minded.

 

[beorhthelm]

Move on ? You were the one questioning nationalisation, my point is the exorbitant profiteering by energy companies would be far better served in the hands of the people/ state, rather than in the pockets of the super rich and foreign governments etc.

and my point is across europe there's various flavours of mixed market economy, private, state control or ownership and we're all in the same boat. no use harping back to 1979 and thinking this is UK unique situation, and we may find benefits of more diversified energy supply. state energy policies have failed so the idea the state could run utilities better is questionable.

 

[cunning fergus]

Move on ? You were the one questioning nationalisation, my point is the exorbitant profiteering by energy companies would be far better served in the hands of the people/ state, rather than in the pockets of the super rich and foreign governments etc. Who now own all the energy generators and suppliers. The whole privatisation of all our utilities, railways, Royal Mail, British telecom etc etc was a con feeding on private investors short term greed and ultimately ending up as privately owned conglomerates feasting on the public who have no choice but to pay for and add to the wealth of the few. If that makes me some sort of communist in your eyes then so be it. Rather that than have the outlook of you and your political leanings.

Paying more for energy and other consumables is the reality of “standing with Ukraine”.

Those damping their mattress must have missed the memo.

One way or another it’s suck it up time unless the general view of the electorate to the Ukraine situation is, meh, let the Russkis get on with it…….etc.

 

[nicko31]

Move on ? You were the one questioning nationalisation, my point is the exorbitant profiteering by energy companies would be far better served in the hands of the people/ state, rather than in the pockets of the super rich and foreign governments etc. Who now own all the energy generators and suppliers. The whole privatisation of all our utilities, railways, Royal Mail, British telecom etc etc was a con feeding on private investors short term greed and ultimately ending up as privately owned conglomerates feasting on the public who have no choice but to pay for and add to the wealth of the few. If that makes me some sort of communist in your eyes then so be it. Rather that than have the outlook of you and your political leanings.

We really need to move toward some level of state ownership in energy generation in the interests of energy security and also provide some disconnect from the worldwide market for energy.

That should start with renewables. We need to take back control

Don't even look at BP's figures this morning

 

[Jim in the West]

It really does amaze me how we all seem to be meekly accepting widespread hunger and no doubt many, many deaths due to the cold this winter....at the same time watching energy companies ratcheting up tens of billions in annual profits.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

We really need to move toward some level of state ownership in energy generation in the interests of energy security and also provide some disconnect from the worldwide market for energy.

That should start with renewables. We need to take back control

Don't even look at BP's figures this morning

I agree about the state control but not for the reason of achieving a disconnect from the worldwide market. That aim isn’t realistic as we would then be subject to price spikes that couldn’t be smoothed by energy imports and missed revenue from excess supply. Also, the taxpayer would bear the brunt of all capital investment. It is more realistic to hope for regulated hedging of the country’s energy needs.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

It really does amaze me how we all seem to be meekly accepting widespread hunger and no doubt many, many deaths due to the cold this winter....at the same time watching energy companies ratcheting up tens of billions in annual profits.

These energy companies that keep being mentioned only own a small fraction of global energy supply. OPEC and various other state owned oil companies control 80-90 per cent of global energy.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I’m not rigidly ideological either way on privatisation. I think we should assess each sector. Some examples, imho:

Railways - I think it’s a nonsense that in the South East we have Southern, SE, Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Network Rail. It’s not a genuine market that’s led to lower rail fares, far from it. But the relatively low dividends paid out would make bugger all difference to rail fares, if it was all nationalised, again. In reality Westminster subsides UK railways by £10b’s a year including infrastructure. One entity makes sense, I’m not bothered if it’s private or public. British Rail wasn’t good, always in the news itself for strikes, leaves on the line, awful slam door trains, angry commuters.

Water - again, one national entity makes sense, if state owned it would end lucrative dividends, lowering bills to an extent.

Rolls Royce, BA, BT … it was quite right that they were taken into private ownership. Successful ever since, no longer requiring subsidies for incompetence.

Gas and elec suppliers, Centrica, etc … I’m open minded.

Most of this. BT in particular was a good privatisation - it's reduced the cost of telecoms not only to business but also to the consumer. The unbundling of the exchanges has allowed competitors such as Virgin Media, Virtual 1, City Fibre and even Sky to offer products that keep BT prices in check.

Where I disagree is being open minded about gas and elec - these really should be state owned even if it's at arms length like the CAA or Network Rail. I actually think every household should get a 'free' allowance of gas, elec and water. You then pay for anything over your free allowance.

 

[schmunk]

Railways - I think it’s a nonsense that in the South East we have Southern, SE, Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Network Rail. It’s not a genuine market that’s led to lower rail fares, far from it. .

Southern, Thameslink and Gatwick Express are all brandnames of the same company, Govia.

Southeastern was also the same company until late last year when the government stripped Govia of the franchise. It is now effectively nationalised, as it's being run by a quango "DfT OLR Holdings".

Network Rail manages the tracks countrywide and doesn't run any train services. It's also government-owned, so effectively a nationalised industry.

 

[nicko31]

I agree about the state control but not for the reason of achieving a disconnect from the worldwide market. That aim isn’t realistic as we would then be subject to price spikes that couldn’t be smoothed by energy imports and missed revenue from excess supply. Also, the taxpayer would bear the brunt of all capital investment. It is more realistic to hope for regulated hedging of the country’s energy needs.

How exactly would regulated hedging work?

I'd like to see the government issue green bonds so the public could invest in our infrastructure and whats more they'd get a secure return...

 

[beorhthelm]

I agree about the state control but not for the reason of achieving a disconnect from the worldwide market. That aim isn’t realistic as we would then be subject to price spikes that couldn’t be smoothed by energy imports and missed revenue from excess supply. Also, the taxpayer would bear the brunt of all capital investment. It is more realistic to hope for regulated hedging of the country’s energy needs.

people ignore that side of things, that companies profit on the back of years of investment. when state owned that investment is not available, should be spent on front line services. profits from around the world bring in billions of taxes too. we can look at countries around the world that try to control markets, and see how they fail all the time, and policy is partial cause of the energy crisis. markets get things wrong too, just less often and recover more swiftly.

 

[beorhthelm]

How exactly would regulated hedging work?

I'd like to see the government issue green bonds so the public could invest in our infrastructure and whats more they'd get a secure return...

where there is an economic return from green infrastructure investing, companies are already doing it and you can buy their shares or bonds. government bonds are a way for government to borrow, they fund the interest from taxes, not investment returns. what green bonds ask for is uneconomical projects to be subsidised by government paying investors out of taxes. where you might want some investment anyway, bypass the fancy names and lump in with the rest of government borrowing and subsidies.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

How exactly would regulated hedging work?

I'd like to see the government issue green bonds so the public could invest in our infrastructure and whats more they'd get a secure return...

What I mean by regulated hedging is a national strategy for hedging. Retail companies have been guilty of under hedging. Many appear to have taken a commercial decision not to hedge, motivated by speculation, hope and fear of differing from the crowd and therefore penalized in their stock price. This is not a sector of the market that should be competing. Regulation means pooling the risk and having a transparent hedging strategy. We can’t be insulated from global prices but we can manage the risk better. I might be wrong but you seem to be implying we could lower energy prices in some way. Realistically this can only be achieved by lowering demand. Look at what has happened to Germany as an example of the problem being supply not price. They are entering a period of energy rationing because the problem is access to supply not managing prices downwards. We also have to reduce our demand if we have any hope of removing reliance on fossil fuel sources as these are the highest cost and are called on last by the grid. Reduce demand and the consequence will be a green economy and eventual lower prices.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

So we want something from someone. But we disagree on the market price, so we’re proposing to get it anyway, but at the price we think it should be?

 

[Weststander]

Southern, Thameslink and Gatwick Express are all brandnames of the same company, Govia.

Southeastern was also the same company until late last year when the government stripped Govia of the franchise. It is now effectively nationalised, as it's being run by a quango "DfT OLR Holdings".

Network Rail manages the tracks countrywide and doesn't run any train services. It's also government-owned, so effectively a nationalised industry.

But the nonsense of not being allowed on other companies trains, heading for the same destination.

 

[golddene]

Most of this. BT in particular was a good privatisation - it's reduced the cost of telecoms not only to business but also to the consumer. The unbundling of the exchanges has allowed competitors such as Virgin Media, Virtual 1, City Fibre and even Sky to offer products that keep BT prices in check.

Where I disagree is being open minded about gas and elec - these really should be state owned even if it's at arms length like the CAA or Network Rail. I actually think every household should get a 'free' allowance of gas, elec and water. You then pay for anything over your free allowance.

Dear o dear Westie, you’ve gone and done it now ! They’ll be calling you a commie next !

 

[schmunk]

But the nonsense of not being allowed on other companies trains, heading for the same destination.

Which *technically* they're not allowed to do. But do do...