Starmer intervenes on plans for higher energy bills in the South
Sir Keir Starmer has intervened in controversial net zero proposals to make homes and businesses in the South pay more for power than those in the North, amid fears of a voter backlash.
In recent days, Downing Street has taken a growing interest in plans for so-called zonal electricity pricing being considered by Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary. No10 officials have contacted industry chiefs to signal that the Prime Minister is overseeing the potential policy.
Downing Street is understood to have requested a further review of the costs and benefits – raising the prospect that the idea could be killed off or kicked into the long grass.
Zonal pricing aims to capture efficiencies by lowering the relative cost of electricity close to wind farms and has already sparked a bitter war of words among energy bosses.
It would result in Britain being divided into zones, with prices in each based on local supply and demand. There is currently one national price.
Supporters claim the switch would lead to savings of £52bn for consumers overall, as well as a £27bn saving on grid upgrades that would no longer be required.
Sir Keir's intervention is the latest sign of tensions within Labour over net zero. Pledges on job creation, investment in carbon capture technology, and heat pump and electric car targets have all sparked fierce policy debates across Whitehall.
Mr Miliband's officials are said to be supportive of zonal pricing but the Energy Secretary himself has yet to declare a position.
Whitehall sources insisted no final decisions had been made and that a range of views were still being considered.
The involvement of Downing Street will be interpreted as a sign of political anxiety about the controversial policy.
Nigel Farage's Reform UK has made net zero and the cost of energy a key campaign issue and pledged to fight plans to roll out renewable power projects and pylons across the countryside.
Giving a speech in Scotland this week, Mr Farage likened the Government's net zero policies to 'the next Brexit'.
In practice, a zonal system would mean higher wholesale power prices for London and the South compared with the North and Scotland, where most wind farms are concentrated.
But supporters say it would slash bills for consumers overall, by reducing the need for costly grid upgrades and slashing the amount paid to wind farms to switch off.
A report by FTI Consulting this year predicted overall savings under zonal of £52bn for consumers over 20 years.
Another report by the same firm, commissioned by Octopus Energy and shared with Mr Miliband's officials, also found that £27bn less would need to be spent on major grid upgrades under the reforms, resulting in nearly 2,000 fewer miles of cables.
The claims of savings are disputed by opponents, who say a major market shake-up will deter investment and imperil the Government's plans for a renewable energy construction boom this decade.
Ministers have argued that the Government's strategy for a power system running almost entirely on renewables by 2030 will bring down prices and provide Britain with greater energy security.
Asked to comment on the involvement of Downing Street, a spokesman for Mr Miliband's department refused to comment on 'speculation'.
But Andrew Bowie, the shadow energy minister, said the Prime Minister's move to scrutinise zonal pricing more closely implied lack of faith in the Energy Secretary.
He said: 'It suggests that the PM does not trust Ed Miliband to take a decision of this magnitude.'
The Government has previously pledged to make a decision by the middle of this year, ahead of a renewable energy auction in the summer that will hand subsidies to major wind farm projects that are vital to Mr Miliband's clean power goals.
That has prompted warnings from wind farm developers that embarking on a major shake-up of the electricity market now will create unnecessary uncertainty, leading to the cancellation of schemes or demands for higher power prices to compensate.
Keith Anderson, the chief executive of Scottish Power, last month urged ministers not to 'snatch defeat from the jaws of victory' by pushing ahead with the reforms.
At the same time, ministers are under intense pressure to cut energy bills for households and businesses following Mr Miliband's pre-election promise to slash them by £300 a year.
Critics say the existing national pricing system also distorts the market – for example, by encouraging batteries to charge at the wrong times and inter-connectors to send power from Britain to Europe even when it is needed in the South.
In recent months, the Government has sought to quell wind developer concerns about the policy by suggesting that existing schemes will benefit from 'grandfathering' – meaning they would retain current payment terms.
Mr Miliband is also weighing up an alternative proposal that would seek to reform the national electricity pricing system to better reflect 'locational signals', although these have not been fleshed out.
A key moment in the debate is likely to come next week, when Mr Miliband is expected to make his recommendation, for or against zonal pricing, to Downing Street.
If zonal pricing is implemented it would be the biggest shake-up of the market since privatisation in the 1990s.
Richard Tice, Reform UK's energy spokesman, said: 'Zonal pricing is a trick designed to try to cover up the ever-rising energy bills we face because of subsidies to renewable energy.
'Keir Starmer is now panicking over the costs of renewables and the loss of votes to Reform.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Musk feud presents 'unprecedented' dynamic compared to past Trump disputes: expert
The ongoing feud between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, his one-time "special government employee," has brought an "unprecedented" dynamic compared to other famous disputes, long-time Democratic political strategist and Fox News contributor Jacques DeGraff said. After somewhat muted rumblings from Musk about why he opposed a Trump-endorsed Republican spending package, the DOGE leader launched complaints after Trump began firing back this week, including threats aimed at Musk's business revenue. "It's unprecedented, but the reality is that what makes it a singular moment in history is that no single figure has ever been able to say, 'I made a president and then (fell) out with that individual," DeGraff told Fox News Digital Friday. "There have been groups, there have been individuals who wanted to pretend that they did, but the record is clear. And, I mean, this man (Elon) brought his son into the Oval Office. He wore a hat and didn't wear a suit to the Oval Office. He clearly had carte blanche. … The president, in effect, did a Tesla ad in the Rose Garden … and now they've fallen out in life." DeGraffe, who has been a political advocate and strategist for years, quipped that, ordinarily, "we would have to go to family court," adding "what's the court here?" Trump is no stranger to quarrels with his staff. During his first term, his relationship soured with his National Security Advisor, John Bolton, and his press secretary, Anthony Scaramucci, after they diverged on different issues and publicly criticized Trump. But, for DeGraffe at least, this quarrel has "distinguished itself from anything in the past." One major difference he pointed to is the implications for both parties in this spat. "Tesla stock has dropped $150 billion, Trump stock has dropped but it also occurs at the same time as this legislation and so that is going to have – no matter how it turns out – it's going to have massive political and public policy implications for the country," DeGraffe said. "So this is no small dispute." DeGraffe also contended that this is "the first time" there has been a major deviation from Trump "from the MAGA side of the aisle." He suggested the split could be bad news for Trump and others who hope to see the GOP's budget package pass the finish line in its current form. "This major split will allow other players to take positions other than the party line, and it gives them room and comfort and cover in order to do so," DeGraffe suggested. "Will senators who follow Musk, or, better yet, disagree with Musk, face intensely funded primaries? "That's a consideration that everyone involved will have to take. … As a lifelong Democrat, I'm sitting with my bowl of popcorn saying, 'Go at it.' Because anything that slows this horrific legislation has got to be good news to the rest of the country." However, while DeGraffe sees the Trump-Musk feud as having wide-ranging and lasting implications, GOP political strategist Dallas Woodhouse says he thinks the feud is unimportant to most Republicans. "I am currently at the North Carolina State GOP convention, and this is not a topic of concern among activists," Woodhouse said. "No doubt it makes for funny and entertaining X posts, but the GOP faithful are laser-focused on growing the new diverse GOP/Trump winning coalition."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels
The government is struggling to cut the amount of foreign aid it spends on hotel bills for asylum seekers in the UK, the BBC has learnt. New figures released quietly by ministers in recent days show the Home Office plans to spend £2.2bn of overseas development assistance (ODA) this financial year - that is only marginally less than the £2.3bn it spent in 2024/25. The money is largely used to cover the accommodation costs of thousands of asylum seekers who have recently arrived in the UK. The Home Office said it was committed to ending asylum hotels and was speeding up asylum decisions to save taxpayers' money. The figures were published on the Home Office website with no accompanying notification to media. Foreign aid is supposed to be spent alleviating poverty by providing humanitarian and development assistance overseas. But under international rules, governments can spend some of their foreign aid budgets at home to support asylum seekers during the first year after their arrival. According to the most recent Home Office figures, there are about 32,000 asylum seekers in hotels in the UK. Labour promised in its manifesto to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds". Contracts signed by the Conservative government in 2019 were expected to see £4.5bn of public cash paid to three companies to accommodate asylum seekers over a 10-year period. But a report by spending watchdog the National Audit Office (NAO) in May said that number was expected to be £15.3bn. Asylum accommodation costs set to triple, says watchdog Asylum hotel companies vow to hand back some profits On June 3, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told the Home Affairs Committee she was "concerned about the level of money" being spent on asylum seekers' accommodation and added: "We need to end asylum hotels altogether." The Home Office said it was trying to bear down on the numbers by reducing the time asylum seekers can appeal against decisions. It is also planning to introduce tighter financial eligibility checks to ensure only those without means are housed. But Whitehall officials and international charities have said the Home Office has no incentive to reduce ODA spending because the money does not come out of its budgets. The scale of government aid spending on asylum hotels has meant huge cuts in UK support for humanitarian and development priorities across the world. Those cuts have been exacerbated by the government's reductions to the overall ODA budget. In February, Sir Keir Starmer said he would cut aid spending from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% by 2027 - a fall in absolute terms of about £14bn to some £9bn. Such was the scale of aid spending on asylum hotels in recent years that the previous Conservative government gave the Foreign Office an extra £2bn to shore up its humanitarian commitments overseas. But Labour has refused to match that commitment. Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy at the Bond network of development organisations, said: "Cutting the UK aid budget while using it to prop up Home Office costs is a reckless repeat of decisions taken by the previous Conservative government. "Diverting £2.2bn of UK aid to cover asylum accommodation in the UK is unsustainable, poor value for money, and comes at the expense of vital development and humanitarian programmes tackling the root causes of poverty, conflict and displacement. "It is essential that we support refugees and asylum seekers in the UK, but the government should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul." Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Committee, said the government was introducing "savage cuts" to its ODA spending, risking the UK's development priorities and international reputation, while "Home Office raids on the aid budget" had barely reduced. "Aid is meant to help the poorest and most vulnerable across the world: to alleviate poverty, improve life chances and reduce the risk of conflict," she said. "Allowing the Home Office to spend it in the UK makes this task even harder." "The government must get a grip on spending aid in the UK," she said. "The Spending Review needs to finally draw a line under this perverse use of taxpayer money designed to keep everyone safe and prosperous in their own homes, not funding inappropriate, expensive accommodation here." Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "Labour promised in their manifesto to end the use of asylum hotels for illegal immigrants. But the truth is there are now thousands more illegal migrants being housed in hotels under Labour. "Now these documents reveal that Labour are using foreign aid to pay for asylum hotel accommodation – yet another promise broken." A Home Office spokesperson said: "We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure, and continue to take action, restoring order, and reduce costs. This will ultimately reduce the amount of Official Development Assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. "We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4bn by 2026." Is the government meeting its pledges on illegal immigration and asylum?
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Reform UK struggles to find friends to share council power
Reform UK's success in the recent local elections has propelled many councillors with limited or no political experience into council chambers across England. While Reform UK's rise was the big story of those elections, almost half of the councils up for grabs were not won outright by any single party. That means many of those newbie councillors are now navigating so-called hung councils, where parties with little in common often work together to get the business of local government done. But so far, it hasn't panned out that way for Reform UK, which isn't involved in any formal coalitions, pacts or deals in areas where there were local elections this year. This was despite rampant speculation about Reform-Conservative coalitions ahead of the polls, with party leaders Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage not ruling out council deals. So, what's going on? In some places - Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Leicestershire - Reform UK has enough councillors to form minority administrations and is attempting to govern alone. In other areas where coalitions were possible, Reform UK has either shunned co-operation or vice versa. Where Reform UK has explored potential partnerships locally, its policies have been viewed with suspicion by the established parties. In Cornwall, the Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Conservatives refused to work with Reform UK, even though it was the biggest party and had won the most seats. Instead, the Lib Dems teamed up with independent councillors to run Cornwall Council as a minority administration. That infuriated Reform UK's group leader in Cornwall, Rob Parsonage, who branded the coalition deal "undemocratic" and "a total stitch-up". Did other parties contrive to exclude Reform UK? The newly minted Lib Dem council leader, Leigh Frost, does not think so. "The reality is our core values at heart of it just stand for two very different things and it makes working together incompatible," Frost told the BBC. "And then Reform was given two weeks to try to form an administration and chose not to." Frost said Reform UK's Cornwall candidates mainly campaigned on immigration. This was echoed in conversations with other local party leaders across the country. The BBC was told Reform's candidates had little local policy to offer and mostly focused on national issues, such as stopping small boats crossing the English Channel. Slashing "wasteful spending" by councils, like Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) in the US, was also a common campaign theme. In Worcestershire, where Reform won the most seats but fell short of a majority, the party's supposed lack of local policy was a major sticking point for the Conservatives. "They haven't got a local prospectus and that was part of the problem," said Adam Kent, Tory group leader on Worcestershire County Council. "They didn't stand on any local issues. It was on national politics. How can you go into coalition with somebody if you don't even know what they stand for?" Joanne Monk, the Reform UK council leader in the county, said she only had "a brief couple of chats" with other party leaders but was uncompromising on coalitions. "I'm damned sure we're not on the same wavelength," she said. She followed the lead of Farage, who ruled out formal coalitions at council level but said "in the interests of local people we'll do deals", in comments ahead of the local elections. In Worcestershire, Reform UK's minority administration may need to do deals to pass key decisions and avoid other parties banding together to veto their plans. Recognising this, she acknowledged other parties were "going to have to work with us at some point". In Northumberland, the Conservatives retained their position as the largest party and gave the impression they were willing to entertain coalition talks with Reform UK, which gained 23 seats. "I said I would work with anyone and my door is open," said Conservative council leader Glen Sanderson. "But Reform the next day put out a press release saying the price for working with the Conservatives would be extremely high. So on that basis, I assumed that was the door closed on me." No talks were held and the Conservatives formed a minority administration. Weeks had passed after the local elections before Mark Peart was voted in as Reform UK's local group leader in the county. As a result, he wasn't in a position to talk to anybody. "Everything had already been agreed," Peart said. "It was too late." Reform UK sources admitted the party was caught a bit flat-footed here and elsewhere as many of its new councillors got the grips with their new jobs in the weeks following the local elections. A support network for those councillors, in the form of training sessions and a local branch system, is being developed by the party. But this week Zia Yusuf, one of the key architects behind that professionalisation drive and the Doge cost-cutting initiative, resigned as party chairman, leaving a gap in the party's leadership. Reform UK's deputy leader, Richard Tice, said the party's success at the local elections "was partly because of the significant efforts and improvements to the infrastructure of the party" spearheaded by Yusuf. Though Yusuf is gone, the party has considerably strengthened its foundations at local level, after gaining 677 new councillors and two mayors. A Reform UK source said party bosses will be keeping an eye out for stand-out councillors who could go on to become parliamentary candidates before the general election. They said in areas where Reform UK runs councils as a minority administration, it's going to take some compromise with other parties and independents to pass budgets and key policies. In the messy world of town halls and council chambers, that could be a tough apprenticeship. Reform UK prepares for real power on a council it now dominates Sir John Curtice: The map that shows Reform's triumph was much more than a protest vote Reform UK makes big gains in English local elections