Livingston MP welcomes Ofgem's energy price cap drop
Livingston MP Gregor Poynton, has welcomed Ofgem's announcement that energy bills will fall by £129 a year for typical households, providing much-needed relief for families across the constituency.
From July 1, the energy price cap will drop by seven per cent to £1,720 per year for a typical household using both electricity and gas and paying by Direct Debit. This means families will save around £11 every month on their energy bills.
'This is fantastic news for working families in Livingston,' said Mr Poynton. 'At a time when household budgets are under pressure, this £129 annual reduction will make a real difference to people's finances.
'That's money that can go towards other essential family expenses or be saved for the future.'
The reduction comes as global wholesale energy prices have fallen, with Ofgem's latest quarterly review reflecting these lower costs in the price cap that protects millions of households from excessive charges.
However, Mr Poynton emphasised that long-term energy security for Livingston and the rest of the country can only come through the Government's mission for clean homegrown power.
He said: 'While today's news is welcome, we need to get off the rollercoaster of fossil fuel markets. That's how we bring down bills for good and give families the certainty they deserve.'
For West Lothian residents, the new rates from 1 July will mean paying an average of 25.73 pence per kilowatt hour for electricity (with a daily standing charge of 51.37 pence) and 6.33 pence per kilowatt hour for gas (with a daily standing charge of 29.82 pence).
'Every penny counts for families across West Lothian,' added Mr Poynton. 'This price reduction shows that the Government's approach is working, but we won't stop here.
'Our commitment to clean, homegrown energy will deliver the long-term security and affordability that my constituents deserve.'
Livingston residents who are struggling with energy bills are reminded that their energy supplier must help if they ask, and that switching tariffs or suppliers could potentially save even more money.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
41 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Sir Ben Wallace doesn't know why Afghan superinjunction was imposed
Sir Ben Wallace said his government did not initially apply for a superinjunction to block reporting of a massive data leak relating to Afghan soldiers and he did not know why it had been granted. The then defence secretary said the original application from the Tory government was for a four-month injunction to stop the media from disclosing the details of the leak. But he said that this regular injunction was subsequently upgraded to a superinjunction but he was unaware of the reasons why. He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: 'We went to court seeking a four month injunction to be placed on the reporting of this leak. 'Many of these injunctions are constantly having to be refreshed and between now and back then on numerous occasions government lawyers would have been going back to the court justifying the reason for this. 'I am afraid I was not in court on the 1st of September, I had actually handed over. I don't know why Justice Knowles at the time converted that to a superinjunction. It wasn't what our application was.' The original application for the injunction was made in August 2023 after the Ministry of Defence became aware of the leak. It was revealed yesterday when the superinjunction was lifted that a dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. That prompted the government to set up a secret Afghan relocation scheme to help the victims amid fears they could have been targeted by the Taliban.
The Guardian
42 minutes ago
- The Guardian
French PM may scrap two public holidays to reduce country's crippling debt
France's prime minister, François Bayrou, has proposed scrapping two public holidays as part of radical measures aimed at reducing the country's ballooning deficit, boosting its economy and preventing it being 'crushed' by debt. Outlining the 2026 budget on Tuesday, Bayrou suggested Easter Monday and 8 May, when France commemorates Victory Day, marking the end of the second world war, although he said he was open to other options. The centrist prime minister said: 'The entire nation has to work more so that the activity of the country as a whole increases, and so that France's situation improves. Everyone will have to contribute to the effort.' France is under pressure to bring its public deficit, running at 5.8% of GDP, under the 3% figure required by EU rules, and to rein in €3.3tn of public debt – on which the annual interest, of €60bn, could soon become its biggest budget outlay. The debt mountain represented a 'mortal danger' for a country 'on a cliff edge' and 'still addicted to public spending', Bayrou said, outlining steps he said would cut €43.8bn from the budget, reducing the deficit to 4.6% next year and 3% by 2029. Other measures would include an across-the-board freeze on government spending except for debt servicing and the defence sector, which President Emmanuel Macron demanded should be increased by €3.5bn next year and more in 2027. The budget squeeze will also entail keeping pensions at their 2025 level, capping welfare spending and reducing healthcare expenditure by €5bn. Civil service and government agency salaries would be frozen and public sector job numbers cut. The move to scrap public holidays is likely to meet strong resistance, although France has previously discussed combining VE Day with Armistice Day on 11 November, creating a single memorial day for the victims of the first and second world wars. 'Cancelling two holidays is a direct attack on our history, our roots and on working France,' said Jordan Bardella of the far-right National Rally (RN), the largest single party in parliament. 'No RN MP will accept a measure that amounts to provocation.' Other party leaders were equally damning. The proposals were 'an organised hold-up', said Fabien Roussel of the French Communist party. Jean-Luc Mélenchon of the radical left LFI said it was 'time to expel Bayrou' and 'end this destruction, these injustices'. A Socialist party MP, Boris Vallaud, condemned it as 'a brutal and unacceptable budget'. He added: 'Asking always more from those who have little, and so little from those who have much, is neither serious, effective, nor just.' Macron's decision to call a snap election last year delivered a hung parliament in which Bayrou does not have enough votes to pass a budget without the support of the left or the right, both of which oppose his proposals for different reasons. Without an agreement, the veteran prime minister could face a no-confidence motion similar to the one that toppled his predecessor, Michel Barnier, as early as October, when his detailed budget bill is due to go before to parliament.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Defence Secretary John Healey 'deeply uncomfortable' with government using super-injunction after Afghanistan data breach
The defence secretary has told Sky News he is "deeply uncomfortable" with the government using a super-injunction to keep a massive data breach hidden. Almost 7,000 Afghan nationals are being relocated to the UK as a result of the breach by the British military, with the personal information of close to 20,000 individuals who helped or worked with UK forces being exposed. John Healey told Matt Barbet on Breakfast: "I'm really deeply uncomfortable with the idea that a government applies for a super-injunction. "If there are any [other] super-injunctions in place, I just have to tell you - I don't know about them. I haven't been read into them. "The important thing here now is that we've closed the scheme." Mr Healey defended the government's decision to keep secret a huge data leak that put thousands of lives at risk. The defence secretary said when he first came into government, "we had to sort out a situation which we'd not had access to dealing with before". "That meant getting on top of the risks, the intelligence assessments, the policy complexities, the court papers and the range of Afghan relocation schemes the previous government had put in place," he said. "And it also meant taking decisions that no one takes lightly because lives may be at stake." Mr Healey added that an independent review he launched says that it is now "highly unlikely that being a name on this data set that was lost three-and-a-half years ago increases the risk of being targeted", which is why the whole leak can be revealed. Ministers have to account for applying for a super-injunction Challenged on why it could not be revealed earlier if those on the list are no longer at risk, Mr Healey said the super-injunction "was a matter for the court". He said ministers needed to provide judges with a "fresh assessment" in order to have the super-injunction lifted. Mr Healey also refused to criticise the former Conservative defence minister Ben Wallace for initially applying for the super-injunction, saying he did not know what information the minister had when he took the decision. "But the important thing is they now have to account for those decisions," he added. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
