UK energy – clearing the DECCs

4425

uk-energy--clearing-the-deccs-

Earlier this month, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) made a raft of announcements, including six draft national policy statements on energy planning issues; the identification of no less than 10 sites for new nuclear-build; and a framework for developing clean coal plants. After 12 years of Government indecision on key energy issues, policy initiatives are coming out in droves as the decks are cleared ahead of the General Election.

Yet, the prospects for new generation investment, except for gas-fired plants, are not bright. On the nuclear front, new nuclear-builsd are heavily dependent on EdF, which has just recruited a new Chief Executive, Henri Proglio: his priority is to cut EdF’s c£23 billion of net debt. Already, EdF’s Constellation Energy investment in the US is under review. Certainly, there is no guarantee that new nuclear-build in the UK will remain high on EdF’s investment priorities - given that no revenues would accrue before 2018. (Memo to Ed Llewellyn, David Cameron’s Chief of Staff – get the boss to meet Proglio sharpish).

The German joint venture for UK new nuclear-build between E.On and RWE looks somewhat flaky, especially as E.On’s net debt has reached £40 billion. Moreover, the recent German election result gives both companies far better nuclear prospects in their homeland. DECC’s great green hope has always been Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), but - despite Vattenfall’s 30MW Schwarze Pumpe oxyfuel demonstration plant in Germany - the technology is many years from full-scale deployment. The costs, too, are very uncertain.

Hence, the outlook for new UK coal-fired generation looks grim especially since all such plants with a capacity of over 300 MW will now need full CCS installation at the outset. With renewable generation projects experiencing serious fund-raising pressures and long-term gas supplies being subject to real uncertainty, closing the UK’s widening energy gap looks very challenging.

Is DECC’s confidence misplaced?

Key man in key job?

4427

key-man-in-key-job-

Tony Blair's chances of becoming the first president of the European Council are reported to be fading fast. With the horse-trading culture of the European Commission, attention now turns to how the UK might be compensated for failing to secure the top job. The name of David Miliband was raised as a possible candidate for the EU's first 'high representative,' to encourage European countries to show more co-ordination on foreign policy, but the Prime Minister has said he 'couldn't be spared,' and was 'never a candidate.' Now the Evening Standard reports a story from Le Monde that Lord Mandelson's name is being considered for the post.

It would be a bold but controversial choice. Lord Mandelson twice had to resign his cabinet posts after allegations of impropriety, but was cleared of wrongdoing. He had enjoyed a successful stint at the DTI (as it was) and as Northern Ireland Secretary managed to win the trust of all sides. His spell as EU trade commissioner was also a relatively successful one, and with limited room to manoeuvre, he managed to work for generally freer trade.

It would be good for Europe and the world if the high representative were someone with a transatlantic perspective, and someone with a track record in favour of opening trade borders. The danger of Europe setting itself up as a 'counterweight' to the USA and Russia would be diminished if he were appointed. He is an accomplished diplomat and negotiator, and has shown himself quite prepared to back words with deeds when necessary.

His appointment would come at a bad time for the Labour government, and would be seen by some as a public acceptance of the defeat that everyone privately knows is coming.

Madsen Pirie has just published "101 Great Philosophers," summarizing the ideas of significant thinkers.

As easy as riding a bike

4428

as-easy-as-riding-a-bike

Or not.

The BBC: Auntie or Floozy?

Nobody calls the BBC “Auntie” any more. “Auntie” was an affectionate name for someone who might have been a trifle prim and stuffy at times, but who was basically reliable and behaved herself with decorum. “Auntie” was not the type of person who stayed in Las Vegas hotels, clocked up taxi rides at £200 a time, or who went to town on expensive lunches and dinners.

The revelations concerning the expenses charged by top BBC executives are but the latest in a series of blunders and scandals that seem to beset the corporation. Its image was badly dented by disclosures that it encouraged quiz show callers to make costly calls even after the prizes had already been awarded. Nor was it helped by its handling of the prank calls by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand, by disclosures that it had made a documentary seem more significant by altering its chronology, or by misrepresenting an apparent row involving Queen Elizabeth.

The bloated expense claims will be taken by the BBC’s critics as further evidence that it cannot be trusted to handle the cash it receives from taxpayers with any sense of responsibility, and that ways of funding it alternative to the licence fee must be found. Certainly some of the claims raise eyebrows. The BBC’s top executives average over £200,000 per year in pay, with many of them earning more than the Prime Minister, yet some of them still find time to claim 70p parking meter charges. And some of their expense claims bear witness to a lifestyle that most of their licence-fee payers can only envy.

Most people struggle with public transport, making the best they can of buses and trains, yet two BBC personnel between them clocked up over £10,000 on taxi bills over a three month period. The BBC defends this, saying that taxis are “more convenient and cost-effective” than public transport. Most people would agree with this, though unable themselves to spend public money on satisfying that convenience.

The claims may not be as exotic as some claimed by MPs, but the same principle is at stake. The public does not like to see those funded by taxpayers living it up while ordinary people have to struggle to get by. It is seen as a bad indicator when a business organization allows bloated expense claims by its personnel, and the same is true of the BBC. Coming after revelations over the huge sums they pay their celebrities, the public is beginning to think that their money is being passed around in buckets. Greater accountability and alternative methods of funding have just moved higher up the agenda.

Published on Telegraph.co.uk here.

Official culture

4423

official-culture-

David Cameron has stressed the need for a cultural change in Britain, and indicated how big a task this will be. Nowhere is this needed more than in officialdom. A report yesterday told how a 67 year-old grandfather was arrested for using one swear word to a council official. Six days after the incident, police staged a dawn raid on his home at 5.35am, made him dress, took him to the station, held him in a windowless cell for 6 hours, took his fingerprints and DNA, and fined him an £80 fixed penalty.

Some might think this an excessive over-reaction, questioning the need for a dawn raid and detention over such an incident. Some might even suggest, as the hapless victim did, that maybe there could be more pressing demands on police time, given the volume of more serious crimes taking place.

What it does illustrate is the culture, both of council officials and of the police. It is indicative of the attitude of bodies which have ceased to regard themselves as public servants and instead regard themselves as masters. The culture of officialdom which engenders such incidents might be a good place for Mr Cameron to start…

Check out Madsen Pirie's new book, "101 Great Philosophers."

Dinner with Sir John Major

4422

dinner-with-sir-john-major-

Sir John Major was guest of honour at an Adam Smith Institute dinner at St Stephen's Club in Westminster. Sir John has done a great deal of travelling since he left the Commons, and has seen the tremendous advances made by India and China, and by some Middle East countries. His remarks on the world's probable future development and Britain's place in it were thus extremely well-informed.

He stressed in particular the importance which the rapidly-developing countries are giving to education, and the urgency of ensuring that in the UK, too, education is accorded the importance it needs to secure Britain a place in the forefront of research, development, and economic expansion.

Sir John's speech was a tour de force, showing complete mastery of his subject, and he contributed both eloquence and insight to the lively question and answer session that followed his remarks.

Tobin Tax or bankrupcy

4421

tobin-tax-or-bankrupcy

During the G20 finance ministers meeting in St. Andrews, the British Prime Minister addressed the G20 countries to implement a worldwide tax on financial transactions. Gordon Brown's argued for the imposition of a multi-billion pound tax on international transactions is to get "a better economic and social contract to reflect the global responsibilities of financial institutions to society''. In short to make banks socially responsible, and urge them not to take unnecessary risks.

Wouldn’t it be better if risk calculations in banks were based on the risk of going bankrupt instead of those imposed by government intervention and regulation? Unfortunately, Gordon Brown himself has played an active role in removing this part of the risk calculation by using taxpayer money to bail out the banks.

Gordon Brown has said that the UK would not act on its own and implement the Tobin tax without a global agreement. This is no brainer for most of them. US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has turned down the Prime Minister's irresistible offer. No surprises there.

Things can only get better?

4424

things-can-only-get-better

Dr Eamonn Butler in Human Events on what New Labour teaches the US.

Line in the Sand

4419

line-in-the-sand-

There has been much discussion of David Cameron's proposal to enact a law requiring a UK referendum before any new European treaties can take effect. Obviously there must be also be some repatriation of powers from Brussels in areas where we feel our sovereignty is unnecessarily and unacceptably compromised, and the proposed law will do nothing to achieve that. But there are three vital areas which the Cameron law will protect from future encroachment.

There will be no unified European foreign policy without a new, post-Lisbon treaty. There will be no unified European army under European command. And there will be no Europe-wide system of taxation decided in Brussels and levied equally across the EU. Any of these would require a new treaty, and such a treaty would require UK citizens to assent to it in a referendum.

The point is that there are European politicians with such ambitions, people who want to turn the EU into a unified super-state to match the continental scale of the US and Russia. This is one reason behind the almost hysterical abuse heaped on the proposal by some European ministers. They have spotted, correctly, that it will put a permanent limit on their centralizing ambitions.

Much of Europe's progress towards "ever closer union" has been achieved, often by stealth, by the political class of Europe over and against the wishes of ordinary citizens of European countries. That will change once the new bill is passed, enfranchising British voters by giving them a direct say in any future moves. While the proposed law will not solve the problem of present and previous European intrusion into affairs that can and should be decided in Britain, it will draw a line in the sand, making it difficult for more UK sovereignty to be lost without the direct consent of its citizens.

Check out Madsen Pirie's new book, "101 Great Philosophers."

Big Brother is in your home

4418

big-brother-is-in-your-home

All telecoms companies and internet service providers will shortly be required by law to keep a record of every customer's personal communications. This all inclusive ‘Big Brother’ system will record phone calls, emails, text messages, and even the links clicked on the internet, all stored for at least a year under government control. According to government officials this type of surveillance is absolutely critical in combating terrorism and hardened crimes.

This is the same kind of rhetoric that was given when CCTV was installed up and sown the country. However, according to the London Police Chiefs less than 3% of crimes were solved with the assistance of CCTV in 2008, even though the number of CCTV cameras in England had reached 4,200,000 in the year 2002. The most fitting use for CCTV has proved to be in discovering which parents lied about where they lived in order to enroll their children in better schools and who is not disposing of their rubbish properly. CCTV is conceivably the best example of a tool implemented to fight crime that quickly turned into a mechanism for domestic control, even going as far as attempting to install them in school toilets.

This new program, no matter how good the intentions, will only add to the already out of control invasions of privacy in this country. Chris Grayling, shadow home secretary has said he has fears about the abuse of the data:

The big danger in all of this is 'mission creep'. This Government keeps on introducing new powers to tackle terrorism and organised crime which end up being used for completely different purposes. We have to stop that from happening.

Grayling is simply pointing out the obvious. The government has repeatedly used programs such as this against its own citizenry without regard for personal privacy, claiming that only tguilty have anything to fear. The crusial question though is at what point do law abiding citizens need to start fearing their own government? If monitoring your private phone calls and emails without a warrant, and without permission from a judge, isn’t enough then what is? I doubt that people would tolerate CCTV in their own homes, but the difference between allowing cameras in our homes and this new program seems to be minuscule at best.

Spencer Aland blogs regularly here.