Is it time to re-nationalise energy firms?

Former_MSE_Debs
Former_MSE_Debs Posts: 890 Forumite
edited 30 October 2012 at 11:30AM in MoneySaving polls
Poll started 30 Oct 2012
Five of the big six have now announced price hikes. The average bill will hit £1,390/year, but if you switch provider the cheapest’s just £1,054.

Until 1986, energy firms were Govt-owned, then privatised into companies with shareholders to try to boost competition and bring efficiencies. World energy prices have gone up enormously and demands for green investment add to costs, though many are angry at rising household bills.

Which of the options in this week's poll is nearest to your view?






Did you vote? Why did you pick that option? Are you surprised at the results so far? Have your say below. To see the results from last time, click this
«134

Comments

  • and the buses, railways and water.
    Nothing to see here, move along.
  • stevemcol
    stevemcol Posts: 1,666 Forumite
    edited 30 October 2012 at 11:32AM
    I know it sounds old fashioned but unless anyone can think of a way of causing the companies to actively compete with each other then re-nationalisation is the only way forward.

    Price regulation could have uninteded consequencies (would probably increase the costs of some tariffs).

    Perhaps if companies had to offer shorter term contracts that actually terminated at the end of a fixed term and had to be positively renewed or switched by the consumer that might make the market more competitive?
    Apparently I'm 10 years old on MSE. Happy birthday to me...etc
  • We do not need to re- nationalise, we need more transparency and better standards so that the market economy can work correctly. Tariff structures are so obscure and complicated that it is difficult without a phd in Maths to fathom the best deal. If we can sort this out, customers will vote with their feet and competition between companies will operate more effectively.
  • stevemcol
    stevemcol Posts: 1,666 Forumite
    We do not need to re- nationalise, we need more transparency and better standards so that the market economy can work correctly. Tariff structures are so obscure and complicated that it is difficult without a phd in Maths to fathom the best deal. If we can sort this out, customers will vote with their feet and competition between companies will operate more effectively.

    Does it matter that the tariffs are obscure and complicated if the comparison sites can cut through it all on our behalf?

    The companies are now forced to tell you your annual consumption in straight forward KWh and the comparison site do seem to handle that value quite well.
    Apparently I'm 10 years old on MSE. Happy birthday to me...etc
  • Squirrel2000
    Squirrel2000 Posts: 40 Forumite
    edited 30 October 2012 at 12:01PM
    I think it matters because there is inequity in the access of consumers to information for a commodity we all need. Some do not have access to comparison sites and even on these sites, there is small print that can catch you out. It needs to be more straightforward to make it fair for all customers.
  • Wizo
    Wizo Posts: 11 Forumite
    Nationalisation is a very bad idea. We know from many many failures that having civil servants and/or politicians run business simply does not work. The West Coast Rail Franchise is a recent example of why Government and business should not mix.

    Government can look to control industries where there is a national interest and clearly utility companies fit this bill. They also need to look at the incestuous wholesale / retail supplier chain and how this impacts costs.

    Regulate by all means but nationalise absolutely not !!!

    Government can do much more in terms of green issues where they can legislate new house builds must have solar power or alternatives energy systems installed.
  • Nationalise or re nationise, I think in a civilised society these pay as you go meters are scandalous and exploitative of the most needy. I think some form of electronic system using a credit card type thing should replace 50p coins so people can keep their family warm in the winter and argue about it in the summer.
  • WestonDave
    WestonDave Posts: 5,154
    Rampant Recycler
    Forumite
    Not sure it would gain us much - allowing for the energy "boards" to contribute as much to government funds as the current companies do in tax, we'd cut around 4% off energy bills. The prices going up are really only a reflection of global market prices for energy which we cannot alter - a nationalised company would still have to pay world market prices for gas which would in turn dictate the minimum selling price - the only variable is whether a small profit is made or not.

    I do wonder whether forcing companies to only have one core tariff (i.e. one price per kWh for gas and the same for electricity) maybe coupled with some regulated options such as a fixed charge for non DD payment etc would force companies to be more focussed on driving down admin costs because they would find it harder to hide behind vast numbers of tariffs. Admin costs and profits are the only parts of the energy price which can be altered - assuming the green charges are not open to being altered.
    Adventure before Dementia!
  • stevemcol
    stevemcol Posts: 1,666 Forumite
    I think it matters because there is inequity in the access of consumers to information for a commodity we all need. Some do not have access to comparison sites and even on these sites, there is small print that can catch you out. It needs to be more straightforward to make it fair for all customers.

    If customers don't have access to comp sites, it's unlikey they'll be able to compare tariffs, no matter how simple they are.
    Not sure of the stats but I'd guess 90% of the population have internet access and for the remainder there are (or should be) support mechanisms and charities to assist.

    Personally I'm really bad at reading small print but have switched 10 times and never had a problem.

    It's within the consumers collective power to sort this out by switching regularly to force competition. If that doesn't come to pass then my vote remains nationalise (loose reigns like Northern Rock / RBS).
    Apparently I'm 10 years old on MSE. Happy birthday to me...etc
  • C_Mababejive
    C_Mababejive Posts: 11,647
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    No..the British whinged..so now they have made their bed,they can lie in it.

    Anyway im not selling you my shares in BG,CNA,NG,BT
    Feudal Britain needs land reform. 70% of the land is "owned" by 1 % of the population and at least 50% is unregistered (inherited by landed gentry). Thats why your slave box costs so much..
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards