Proceeding contribution from Lord Jenkin of Roding (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 1 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Energy Bill.
Energy Bill
I am perfectly happy to leave my water meter where it can be read by the people who come in. Whether eventually it could be read remotely is another question. There are huge advantages if we can move to this. I am impressed by the case made by the Energy Retail Association that this really is one of its highest priorities. It needs a mandate from the Government. That word is increasingly used and I suspect that the Government will eventually want to give one. It is not a question of detailing what should be done; there are arguments about whether each region should have a monopoly supplier. I would be opposed to that, but let us hear all the arguments. Certainly there should not be single designs and that sort of thing because the market is very capable of producing innovative designs, as indeed they currently are. Before anybody can move ahead, a mandate that this has a priority is needed from the Government. The letter I had from Ofgem talks about managing trials of smart meters in more than 15,000 households. My electricity supplier asked if I would join such a trial. Do you know what happened? Because my electricity meter is available for the meter reader in a cupboard on my porch I was told that I could not take part. I wrote back and said, ““Why on earth not?””. I think they probably thought their meter was going to be too valuable and might be nicked. I am not sure that I would want to try to nick somebody else’s electricity meter; it might be rather dangerous. I was disappointed not to be able to take part in the trial that had been offered. These things are happening. If the Government give a mandate and there is a swift advance in the introduction of smart meters, that that will have enormous advantages for consumers, and not just through having an instant reading and a dial which can tell them what is happening. It is far more than that; it is being able to have a lot more sophisticated supply arrangements, remote readings and a whole range of things like that—I will not go into all the details. But it does seem to me that, putting it rather crudely, the Government have got to get on with it. That is what my noble friend on the Front Bench is asking for in the amendment, to which I put my name. We must have the Government’s response to this within 12 months of the Bill becoming an Act. Given what Mr Wicks said on Report in another place, I should have thought that this was something the Government would be perfectly prepared to accept. It may not be properly drafted, but it seems to me that it is perfectly proper for Parliament to ask for this. I support the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 703 c16-7GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Data protection Disadvantaged Costs Conservation Buildings Billing Housing Licensing Health hazards EU law Energy Electricity Fuel poverty Electric cables Natural gas Mergers Meters Standards Technology Takeovers Carbon emissions Social tariffs
- Legislation
- Energy Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:26:43 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488429
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488429
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488429