Households in South set to pay more for electricity under plans being considered by Ed Miliband
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
HOUSEHOLDS in the South face paying more for electricity under plans being considered by the Energy Secretary.
Ed Miliband is looking at zonal pricing which critics say will create a postcode lottery for hard-pressed families.
Sign up for Scottish Sun
newsletter
Sign up
The move would lead to prices being determined by supply and demand in each area — with Scotland benefiting from greater wind supplies.
Octopus Energy and Ovo Energy say it could cut costs and put an end to paying for wind farms that are sitting idle.
But research by energy supplier SSE shows households and businesses in England and Wales will be hit the hardest.
A poll by RenewableUK also found 58 per cent were against the move.
Critics say investment in solar and wind farms will slow, which could damage the chances of meeting Mr Miliband's clean energy plan by 2030.
Jane Cooper at RenewableUK said it would create a postcode lottery on bills.
She added: 'Ministers would essentially be asking companies to build wind and solar farms with no idea of what their future market looks like.'
Acting Shadow Energy Secretary Andrew Bowie said: 'Obsession with Net Zero by 2050 will push up bills further, risk rolling blackouts and make Britain more reliant on China.
'Until Labour heed our calls to abandon the mad dash to Net Zero they will only make families poorer.'
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said: 'We are considering reforms of electricity market arrangements, ensuring that these focus on protecting bill payers and encourage investment. We will provide an update in due course.'
Keir Starmer's deranged drive for Net Zero with eco-zealot Ed Miliband is a threat to UK's national security- here's why
It comes as Sir Keir Starmer today reveals £300million for offshore wind supply chains.
1
Households in the South face paying more for electricity under plans being considered by Ed Miliband
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edinburgh Reporter
an hour ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Winter fuel payment announced in England and Wales means uplift for Scotland
In England and Wales, people who are old enough to receive the State Pension and who have income of less than £35,000 will receive a Winter Fuel Payment this winter. This adds up to 9 million pensioners south of the border – which the UK Government says is around three quarters of all pensioners living there. Winter Fuel payments are no longer paid to Scottish pensioners. In winter 2024/25 pensioners were paid Pension Age Winter Heating Payment through the DWP, but in 2025 The Scottish Government announced that the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment will be paid by Social Security Scotland to all qualifying pensioners. The payment will be either £200 or £300 and £100 to other pensioners. Payment will be made to everyone born before 23 September 1958, who lives in Scotland – and who is in receipt of certain other benefits. The UK Government also confirmed that the change – which is a u-turn on Keir Starmer's previous announcement – will cost around £1.25 billion in England and Wales. It is believed that means-testing of the Winter Fuel Payment will save around £450 million, subject to certification by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) compared to the system of Winter Fuel Payments for everyone regardless of income. In Scotland this payment is devolved and the UK Government said the government will receive a 'mechanical uplift' in their funding as a result of the change in England and Wales. It is thought that might be around £100 million. Social Justice Secretary, Shirley Anne Somerville, said: 'The UK Government's decision to cut the winter fuel payment was a betrayal of millions of pensioners and that is why the Scottish Government took action to introduce a winter heating payment for all pensioners in Scotland. 'I welcome any extension of eligibility by the UK Government, but this is a U-turn the Chancellor should have made a long time ago. But there is still no detail about how the Chancellor intends to go about that. Unfortunately, it still sounds as if many pensioners will miss out. 'We have once again not been consulted on the policy and its implications in Scotland and will scrutinise the proposals carefully when then are announced. I would therefore urge the UK Government to ensure the Scottish Government is fully appraised of the proposed changes as soon as possible. 'The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last week to urge the UK Government to share its plans with us as quickly as possible, so that we can understand any implications for our own programmes and, crucially, our budget.' Previously the UK Government announced that Winter Fuel Payments would be restricted to pensioners in receipt of Pension Credit. When First Minister, John Swinney, attended the round table meeting in London at the end of May he asked the prime minister to restore winter fuel payments to all pensioners regardless of means. The costs will be accounted for at the Budget and incorporated into the next OBR forecast. The Chancellor said she will take decisions on funding in the round at that forecast to 'ensure the government's non-negotiable fiscal rules are met', and confirmed that this will not lead to permanent additional borrowing. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, said: 'Targeting Winter Fuel Payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the Winter Fuel Payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. This will mean over three quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' HMRC will reclaim the payment from anyone earning more than £35,000 and no-one is required to take any action or register for the payment. Winter Fuel Payments are worth £200 per household, or £300 per household where there is someone over 80. Shared payments are made to pensioners not on an income-related benefit. Scottish Labour Scottish Labour Social Security spokesperson, Paul O'Kane, said: 'This is welcome news that will bring even more money to Scotland – on top of the record funding settlement Labour delivered in the budget. 'The last Tory government left our public finances in chaos but Labour has made good progress cleaning up the mess it inherited. 'The Winer Fuel Payment is a devolved payment in Scotland and Scottish Labour has long been clear that we want to see it reinstated for the majority of pensioners up here – but despite their loud spin, the SNP voted against our attempts to do so. 'The SNP must not go ahead with plans that would rob poorer pensioners in order to fund payments for millionaires. 'The SNP must re-examine their own proposals in light of this game-changing announcement, ensure payments reach those most in need, and give a cast-iron guarantee that no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans.' Scottish Greens Scottish Greens Social Security spokesperson Maggie Chapman MSP said: 'Cutting the Winter Fuel Payment was one of the first acts of this Labour government. Elected on a promise of 'change' they brought in sweeping austerity that harmed older people across the UK at a time when the cost of living remains sky high. 'There is no doubt that the damage has already been done, families will have lost loved ones, and illnesses will have been caused over the winter months because of the brutal decision by Rachel Reeves and the Labour Government. 'Labour's cutting of the Winter Fuel Payment, refusal to end the two-child benefit cap and regressive austerity measures are forcing people into poverty in Scotland and across the UK 'The reinstatement of the Winter Fuel Payment for some is a welcome move, but we must go further, the Labour government must end the two-child benefit cap which hits working class families the hardest, and they must reverse their cruel austerity policies. 'Poverty isn't inevitable. It's a political policy, a policy which Rachel Reeves has forced upon hundreds of thousands of people across the UK. If Keir Starmer has any shame, he would finally call an end to her disastrous time as Chancellor.' Independent Age Chief Executive Joanna Elson, CBE, said:'We are pleased that the UK Government has listened to the voices of older people on a low income and reconsidered what was an incredibly damaging change to the Winter Fuel Payment. By widening the eligibility criteria, more older people in financial hardship will now receive this vital lifeline in time for winter. 'Our helpline receives thousands of calls from older people making drastic cutbacks just to get by and the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment made this worse. For millions living on low incomes, the entitlement supports them to turn their heating on and stock up on food during the colder months. 'While the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment are positive, they are not a silver bullet that will end pensioner poverty. Around 2 million older people still live in poverty, and measures must be taken to ensure the long-term financial security of all people in later life. There needs to be a cross-party consensus on the adequate income needed in later life to avoid financial hardship. Once this is established, every older person should be supported to receive this amount. Nobody should have to live in poverty as they age.' Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: 'Commonsense has finally prevailed as the winter fuel cut is reversed for most pensioners. Whilst this is an important step forward, questions will be asked about how this disastrous decision was made in the first place, the damage may not easily be reversed. 'Leadership is about choices and the choice to pit workers against pensioners was simply wrong. 'Instead of what seems to be a never-ending cycle of cuts, Labour needs to revisit the fiscal rules and bite the bullet on a wealth tax. Britain is the sixth richest economy in the world, the idea that we would be picking the pockets of our pensioners was unnecessary and unforgivable.' When the government announced it was cutting the winter fuel payment, Unite mounted a campaign to get the decision overturned. This included organising a vote at Labour conference opposing the cut in winter fuel payments, and grassroots campaigning which got the cut partially reversed in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Westminster Like this: Like Related
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Crackdown on family visas risks breaching human rights laws, Starmer told
A proposed crackdown on family visas aimed at reducing immigration risks breaching human rights laws, Government advisers have warned. The advisers have said that raising the annual salary threshold required for a Briton to bring their foreign partner or spouse to the UK from its current £29,000 to £38,700 would 'most likely' conflict with rules ensuring rights to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The warning, from the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), comes as Sir Keir Starmer tries to cut net migration. Last month, the Prime Minister warned Britain must not become an 'island of strangers'. The Tories under Rishi Sunak proposed the family visa change as part of a plan to slash net migration by 300,000 after it hit a record high of 906,000 in the year ending June 2023.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE 'One rule for them and another for us': Ed Miliband is blasted by Brits who are being forced to object to energy plant plans near their homes AGAIN - when minister's wife did the same recently...
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has been accused of 'sheer hypocrisy' following his wife's objection to a block of flats near their liberal north London home. Householders in Walsall, West Midlands say it is 'one rule for them and another for us' as a potentially explosive energy system is set to come to green belt near them. It comes as prominent academics have raised concerns about the 'eco-friendly' stored energy system saying it could be 'the next Grenfell', with a nearby school also expressing fears. Robert Withers, of the Beacon Action Group, has blamed the rush to Net Zero by 2050 for the development's approval in Great Barr Village at Chapel Lane. He told MailOnline: 'It's an absolute disgrace that Ed Miliband and others in the Labour government are destroying our green belt - it's a tragedy. 'People who live in this conservation area can't even put a shed in the garden. But somebody can come along and say we'll plant this unsightly very, very noisy equipment in the middle of this field - and they'll get away with it. 'These are bombs and this one would be adjacent to a school. If this thing explodes the school children would have to all be evacuated.' The Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) is earmarked for a five-acre field surrounded by ancient buildings, woodland, and rare species of bats. There are fears the UK could see explosions bigger than the one picture above that destroyed the harbour in Beirut in 2020 It would operate using batteries to store electricity which would be released when needed, and has been described as 'crucial technology for integrating renewable energy sources'. The development, set to exist for 40 years, received over 700 objections. It was rejected by the local council but then approved on appeal by the planning inspectors. Householders are now combining their efforts to put a stop to it all together as they challenge the verdict. Last month it emerged Justine Thorton, a High Court judge and wife of Mr Miliband, had written to Camden Council in relation to a five-storey building proposed near their home. She cited concerns the design was 'too tall, too bulky and to dense given the context of the surrounding houses and the wider conservation area'. Among her fellow opponents were actor Benedict Cumberbatch, with many of the campaigners citing concerns around the multiple 'noisy' air source heat pumps due to be attached to the controversial development. Responding to their objections, Jenny Hulme, another opponent to the energy storage system in Walsall said: 'We have to make do and put up with a five-acre field full of Lithium-Ion batteries and the noise, pollution, destruction of biodiversity and wildlife and the ever present thought that the batteries will explode as they have done in many cases across the world. 'Due to the topography of the land, this ticking timebomb would also be built below a 1500+ pupil, plus staff, Secondary School, utter madness and a total disregard for Health and Safety.' She concluded: 'Would the Milibands live next door to that?' Another householder, Miss H B White, said: 'It would be good to think that everyone is treated the same - not one rule for them and another for us! 'The proposed building is next to a Grade II Listed Church, a woodland which has many species of wildlife including foxes, birds, bats (12 varieties) badgers and deer. 'The local school it just above the land which if there is a problem with the BESS will cause issues for the children and staff.' Staff at the school - the Matrix Academy - have come out to speak at recent meetings against the development. It comes as Professors from Oxford University are among those to issue words of warning against the energy storage systems. An article from 2021 authored by Dr Edmund Fordham, Dr Wade Allison and Sir David Melville read: 'The race for renewable energy driven by the 2050 Net Zero target requires energy storage and this is bringing large lithium-ion batteries into our day to day lives, close to our homes and work-places, on an unprecedented scale. 'Government failure to properly understand the dangers of insulating cladding resulted in the Grenfell tragedy. Government needs to get a firm grasp of the hazards of Lithium-ion batteries before there is a another 'green' disaster.' Mr Withers, who has lived in the area for fifty years, said: 'We are expected to live in fear of this potentially explosive device for the next 40 years knowing that any day or night this could blow up, despite scientists telling us they wouldn't live within one mile of it.' The 81-year-old added the article 4 conservation area - 'quality agricultural land - was unsuitable and that the '40 years figure' was 'ridiculous' as 'once you've lost it it's gone forever'. He accused Mr Miliband and his wife of 'sheer hypocrisy'. In Merseyside in 2020, one of three battery cabins on a site caught fire while a shocking eruption also occurred in Beirut, Lebanon that same year. South Korea saw 23 battery farm fires in just two years. Meanwhile a battery fire in Illinois burned for three days and thousands of residents were evacuated. The Labour Party's deputy, Angela Rayner, is currently spearheading the Government's efforts to overhaul planning rules to build 300,000 new homes a year. And the Labour Party said it planned to designate some previously untouched greenbelt land as 'grey belt' so they could get approval for more developments. The flats' developers have relied on Labour's updated planning rules to argue extra homes are needed and that local objections should not stand in the way of houses on brownfield sites Mr Miliband previously vowed to put the 'delayers' in their place as part of his green energy agenda. And Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has also been vehement in his criticism of 'nimbys' and 'blockers' describing himself as a 'yimby' - yes in my backyard. A spokesperson for the Planning Inspectorate said: 'As the appeal is part of a legal challenge we are unable to comment further on the details of the case. 'A key principle of the planning system is that each planning application and any subsequent planning appeal will be treated on its own individual circumstances and merits, in the light of the current local plan for the area, the National Planning Policy Framework and any other specific material considerations.'
