logo
Yes, there is a Europe-wide energy crisis – but must Britain bear the brunt?

Yes, there is a Europe-wide energy crisis – but must Britain bear the brunt?

Independent25-02-2025
Mere months after the last energy price hike, Ofgem has revealed that April's price cap will increase household bills by £111 – that's 6 per cent higher than expected and 9 per cent higher than this time last year, bringing the average to £1,849 per year.
'Rising global wholesale prices for energy are the main reason for the increase' is what Ofgem cited as the motive behind the move. But this just feels like an excuse when we look at the very real fact that Britain already has some of the highest prices in Europe, and many families and elderly people are struggling to keep up.
To put it into perspective, of the 33 European capital cities included in the Household Energy Price Index (HEPI) published in December 2024, London was the fourth most expensive at 36.5 cents (€) per kilowatt hour (kWh), beaten only by Germany (40.23c), Denmark (37.31c) and Belgium (36.91c).
Now, of course this figure is based on several variables: the source of the energy (coal, nuclear, gas, renewables, oil), the way it is taxed, and any subsidies that may exist. However, if you strip out energy network charges and taxes, Germany would rank 10th, lower than Britain, Italy and the Netherlands.
To his credit, Ofgem CEO Jonathan Brearly acknowledged the increase 'puts families under huge stress and increases costs for all customers.' But he also outlined that energy debts 'began during the energy crisis have reached record levels and without intervention will continue to grow.'
He's right, of course. But, Mr Brearly, would you like to tell us when that investment is going to be delivered?
Polling by YouGov for National Energy Action, the fuel poverty charity, found nearly half (49 per cent) of adults are likely to ration energy in coming months. That is what you call a crisis.
The charity is calling for 'additional targeted energy bill support through a social tariff or an expanded Warm Home Discount; a help-to-repay scheme to support households out of debt; and for the government's Warm Homes Plan to provide significant investment to insulate the coldest homes for the poorest households'.
I'd like to be wrong about this, but I'm not sure we're going to see any of them.
What Ofgem has promised is to address the issue of standing charges. They are a fixed fee we all pay as part of our bills, for connection to the network and to cover the price of discounted tariffs, the green transition and suchlike. OfGem says they are going down in parts of the country, but that is not true of everywhere.
The problem with them is they limit one's ability to cut costs by using less energy. Fixed fees are particularly tough on low users. Pensioners would be an example, especially those living alone as many do.
Ofgem plans to force all energy providers to offer zero standing charge tariffs but the new rules won't come in until the winter. And these tariffs can also prove to be very expensive unless you're a very low user.
Says USwitch, the price comparison side, on the subject: 'In most cases it makes sense to go for an energy plan with paid standing charges as there is a greater amount of choice and they're usually cheaper than plans that don't have standing charges.'
To work out whether they'll benefit, people are going to have to turn into energy analysts when they've other things to worry about, such as feeding the kids, paying the mortgage, and the many other financial burdens of modern life.
Ofgem's plans are thus no panacea. They're a sticking plaster and one that will only partially ease the financial bleeding for a limited number of people. At this point, consumers might very well be asking quite why the benefits from renewable power generation, which are formidable once the costs of putting up the turbines have been met, aren't being passed on to consumers.
There is a technical explanation: the price of electricity is determined by the most expensive source of energy to meet the necessary demand. In the UK, that is gas, which makes up a higher proportion of the mix when compared to say France, where nuclear is king.
Needless to say, that isn't going to provide much comfort to those facing sky high bills who may look askance at the wind turbines sprouting up and wonder why they're not helping.
As I wrote yesterday, Britain's green economy is booming and that is a welcome development. It helps power economic growth, provides a lot of well paying jobs and reduces the nation's carbon footprint. Trouble is, the project is going to fall flat on its face if people lose faith in it. They're going to do that if they can't see tangible benefits.
Soaring energy prices are also the last thing the economy needs.They'll hit businesses, already grappling with Rachel Reeves' tax rises, while rock-bottom consumer confidence will remain nailed to the floor.
Politics is about solving problems. This is one that energy secretary Ed Miliband needs to put his mind to, and fast. Neither his pious speeches, the regulator's pious statements, nor woolly sounding technical explanations are going to wash with an increasingly restive public fed up with paying what are shaping up to be Europe's highest energy prices.
Secretary of state, do your job. Fix this.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

History will judge monsters who enabled a genocide
History will judge monsters who enabled a genocide

The National

timean hour ago

  • The National

History will judge monsters who enabled a genocide

Keir Starmer's announcement that Britain will recognise the State of Palestine in September if Israel doesn't agree to a ceasefire and a two-state solution sums up his political project. Starmer himself is an empty vessel, a mere frontman for Labour's most reactionary and self-serving political faction: his own advisers briefed that he thinks he's driving a train, but they had placed him in front of London's driverless District Light Railway. This faction is defined by its cynicism, lacking not just a vision for our disunited kingdom, but a moral core. They saw that growing numbers of MPs were demanding Palestinian recognition, including some of the drones they parachuted into the parliamentary party, whose blind loyalty has been frayed by the realisation they're heading towards electoral apocalypse. READ MORE: Gaza detainees 'tortured and raped' by Israeli forces, United Nations hears The SNP were preparing to force a parliamentary vote on statehood, which would leave Labour exposed. And indeed other European states, like Spain, have already taken this step, with the likes of France making clear they will too. But all Starmer's aides care about is political game playing, rather than what happens to be the right thing to do. And here's the thing – they're not even good at it. They scrapped the universal Winter Fuel Payment because they thought it would win respect as a 'tough decision'. Alas, they project their lack of a heart on to the electorate, who shocked Labour goons by being averse to freezing their grans. They decided to wage war on disabled people with cuts which would drive hundreds of thousands into hardship, and were again shocked at being stopped in their tracks by the consequent revulsion, including from the malfunctioning androids who benefited from their rigged parliamentary selections. In this case, their ruse is as cackhanded as it is morally bankrupt. Any move which recognises the humanity of Palestinians is going to provoke the pro-Israel lobby, who long sank into a sewer of genocidal depravity, and so it proved. What about everyone else – that is, popular opinion, given the polling shows overwhelming public support for recognition of a Palestinian state, an arms embargo on Israel, as well as the arrest of its leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, for war crimes and crimes against humanity? Starmer's team are essentially arguing that if Israel tones down its genocide, then it will withdraw support for Palestinian statehood. The inalienable right of a people to be free is reduced to a crude bargaining chip, a chess piece on a board to be discarded for a greater strategic cause. So who is this supposed to please, exactly? Here's the gruesome truth. Obviously, Britain should have supported Palestinian national self-determination many moons ago. But there won't be any Palestine left to recognise at this rate. Here is the most symbolic gesture on offer, and even that is reduced to a cynical ploy. There is growing pressure on the Government, because they are facilitating what the former UN aid chief, Martin Griffiths, calls the 'worst crime of the 21st century'. Here is an attempt to deflect from action they could be taking, like ending all arms sales to Israel, including crucial components for F-35 jets that are exterminating Palestinians, or imposing sweeping sanctions on Israel. Indeed, earlier this year, Britain joined other Western states in imposing sanctions on two particularly extreme Israeli ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. They are both genocidal maniacs who belong in jail, sure, but it is easy to make them the bogeymen in order to absolve the wider guilt of the Israeli state. Notably, the sanctions were justified on the grounds of their incendiary comments, rather than their actions, because the latter implicates the British government. Nothing our government has done remotely meets the scale of the crime. A consensus of genocide scholars – including Israeli scholars – long ago concluded this is genocide. B'Tselem was one of two Israeli human rights organisations to reach the same conclusion this week, alongside Israeli author David Grossman, who won Israel's top literary prize in 2018. Gaza has been plunged into deliberate famine by an Israeli state which repeatedly broadcast to the world that it was intentionally starving the strip. More hungry Palestinians have been massacred at aid points alone since late May than the total number of Israeli civilians and soldiers killed on October 7. And even the BBC is now having to report that Palestinian children are being systematically shot in the head or chest – evidence which points in only one direction: that the Israeli army is deliberately shooting kids. The depravity is so extreme, documented and confessed to, that it is difficult to know either where to begin or end. The British government had a choice when confronted with an incontrovertible criminal reality: to make itself complicit in this historic abomination, or to abide by the most rudimentary building blocks of international law. It chose the former, and now it seeks to wash away its guilt by publicly agonising over Israel's crimes while making tokenistic gestures about a Palestinian nation it has literally helped to massacre. You would have to be either terminally gullible, or a dupe, to be beguiled by this. Throughout history, monsters didn't realise that that is what they are, but they were still monsters. The same applies to Westminster's rulers – and that will be the definitive conclusion of history and, we can hope, the courts, too.

Arsenal's stance on Eberechi Eze transfer revealed as date release clause expires is confirmed
Arsenal's stance on Eberechi Eze transfer revealed as date release clause expires is confirmed

Daily Mirror

time11 hours ago

  • Daily Mirror

Arsenal's stance on Eberechi Eze transfer revealed as date release clause expires is confirmed

Arsenal have been heavily linked with a move for Crystal Palace star Eberechi Eze this summer, but it remains to be seen if the Gunners can strike a deal for the 27-year-old Arsenal are interested in Crystal Palace star Eberechi Eze, but want to offload a forward before making a formal approach. The Gunners have made six new signings so far this summer, with Viktor Gyokeres, Martin Zubimendi, Noni Madueke, Cristhian Mosquera, Christian Norgaard and Kepa Arrizabalaga all joining the club. ‌ Eze is another player that has been heavily linked with a move to the Emirates and he does have a £68million release clause in his contract. However, multiple reports have stated that the clause expires on Friday. ‌ And BBC Sport are reporting that Arsenal have 'shown no inclination of triggering the forward's release fee', with the Gunners looking to sell before they make any more new signings. The report adds that Arsenal value Eze at less than £68m and 'want to negotiate a deal beneath the agreement'. ‌ Palace have so far been unwilling to negotiate a lower fee, but it is claimed that may change later in the window. When asked about Eze's future back in May, Palace boss Oliver Glasner said: "I don't want to comment on individual players. "We could talk about Marc Guehi, we could talk about Dean Henderson, we could talk about Adam Wharton, we could talk about Jean-Philippe Mateta, Daniel Munoz, Ismaila Sarr who played an incredible, outstanding season for us. We won't sell all of them." And Glasner has been left frustrated with Palace's lack of business so far this summer, having only spent £3m on a backup goalkeeper and a left-back. "Even though all the players are still here, we haven't made the most of the transfer window so far," Glasner admitted. "I was promised that we would be more active and bring in the new players earlier this year. As of now, I have 17 outfield players. "I hope we don't lose any more. If that happens and we get four new ones on deadline day like last year, another false start is possible." ‌ Palace's business has been complicated by the fact that they are still waiting to find out which European competition they will be playing in next season. Palace qualified for the Europa League after winning the FA Cup last season, but have been demoted to the Conference League by UEFA. UEFA ruled that they had breached their multi-club ownership rules, but Palace have lodged an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport and a decision is expected before August 11.

EU banks can weather recession driven by global trade war, stress test shows
EU banks can weather recession driven by global trade war, stress test shows

Reuters

time13 hours ago

  • Reuters

EU banks can weather recession driven by global trade war, stress test shows

MILAN, Aug 1 (Reuters) - Banks across the European Union are strong enough to weather an economic shock driven by geopolitical and trade tensions, the European Banking Authority said on Friday as it presented the outcome of its latest health check of the sector. The EBA tested how 64 European banks, including 51 euro zone lenders, would react to a prolonged recession across the EU and other advanced economies, finding none would breach their core capital requirement, and only one would breach its leverage requirement. "The results indicate that the EU banking system could withstand a severe but plausible macroeconomic scenario, reflecting the resilience built up by banks in recent years," the EBA said, urging lenders to maintain adequate capital. European and U.S. banking authorities introduced formal, comprehensive stress tests after the global financial crisis of 2008 led to costly state bailouts of banks. Some elements of this year's adverse scenario had begun to materialise, the EBA said, pointing to U.S. trade tariffs and escalating tension in the Middle East. Lenders accounting for three quarters of EU banks' total assets took part in the exercise, which simulates the losses banks would incur by analysing their performance over a three-year period under a baseline and an adverse scenario. Under the adverse scenario, worsening geopolitical tensions and protectionist trade policies lift energy and commodity prices, disrupt supply chains and hurt consumption and investment, driving a cumulative 6.3% contraction in EU economic output over 2025-2027. That would translate into combined losses of 547 billion euros for the sampled banks, the EBA said, higher than the 496 billion euros envisaged in its 2023 stress test. While the hit to capital reserves is particularly severe for some European subsidiaries of major U.S. banks, all the lenders remained able to meet core capital requirements, the EBA said, although one would breach the requirement on the leverage ratio. For 17 lenders, the adverse scenario would entail limits or adjustments to bonus and dividend payments for at least one of the three years. In terms of capital reserves - calculated using the current 'transitional' regime that tightens progressively through 2033 - the adverse scenario would knock 3.7 percentage points off the sample's aggregate core capital ratio, pushing it to 12.1% in 2027 from 15.8%. When looking at individual countries, Irish, Danish, French, German and Belgian banks experienced the biggest capital impact, EBA data showed. For individual banks, Landesbank Baden-Wuerttemberg and two other German regional banks, as well France's Credit Agricole and La Banque Postale, saw the largest capital depletion effect. While there is no pass/fail threshold in the EU-wide stress test, its outcome feeds into the risk assessment of lenders carried out by supervisors every year, setting bank-specific capital requirements and guidance known as 'Pillar 2'.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store