Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Tim Yeo (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Energy Bill [Lords].


Energy Bill [Lords]

I begin by drawing attention to my entry in the Register of Members' Financial Interests. I would very much like to find something nice to say about the speech that has just been delivered by the hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Meg Hillier). I listened carefully for 25 minutes and I could not really say that it made any serious contribution at all to the debate. It was extraordinarily churlish in tone and very ill-judged. If ever there was an issue that cried out for a bipartisan, long-term and constructive approach, it is energy policy and climate change. That was wholly lacking from every sentence of the hon. Lady's speech. I warmly welcome the Bill, which is a big—and overdue—step in the right direction. I agree that some details remain to be filled in, but no doubt they will be addressed in Committee. I want to comment briefly on four aspects of energy policy that relate to the Bill. The first, of course, is energy efficiency. The Bill is especially welcome because of its intense focus on energy efficiency, which has always been the Cinderella of energy policy. I have always found that to be extraordinary—it is truly the no regrets policy. Even people who do not accept that climate change is a threat to the conditions of climate stability that have prevailed in the very recent history of our planet, thereby allowing one of the most recently arrived species, human beings, to proliferate in number and enjoy phenomenal and unprecedented success, and who see no advantage, either environmental or economic, in moving to a low-carbon economy can see the merits of greater energy efficiency, which has economic as well as environmental advantages. Those economic advantages accrue to households, rich and poor alike, and to businesses. The green deal, which is the centrepiece of the Bill, is an excellent concept, even if there remain some areas of its implementation that we would like to know more about. The principle that energy efficiency measures can be financed through savings on fuel bills is a good one that is attractive to consumers. In practice, however, although most of the energy efficiency measures needed have a large and fast enough payback to ensure that the golden rule to which the Secretary of State referred—that instalment payments for the improvements will not exceed the cost of the savings made—there will be some measures that probably do not come into that category. I hope therefore that the Government will recognise—not necessarily in the context of the Bill, but soon—that some further incentive might be needed to improve all the housing stock in this country. I urge Ministers, as I have before, to explore more fully how discounts on council tax could be used to encourage faster progress to a comprehensive energy efficiency process. Those discounts could even be introduced on a revenue-neutral basis.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
527 c1072-3 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Consumers Decommissioning Conservation Business Climate change Billing Housing Environment protection Energy Electricity generation Energy supply Electricity Fuel poverty Heating Interest rates Warm front scheme Local government Protection Nuclear power stations Loans Meters Prices Private rented housing Standards Reform Renewable energy Carbon emissions
Legislation
Energy Bill (HL) 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk