Opposition proposals to freeze the price cap - fair for people who have fixed?

jak22

It's good foresight to have predicted a scheme this week to freeze at the April cap. If only I'd known earlier that instead of paying a higher rate for months to guard against prices going up I should have just done nothing and have the bills subsidised.

PennineAcute

[Deleted User] said:

A ‘plan’ is gaining momentum:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/15/centrica-and-octopus-back-plan-to-freeze-uk-energy-bills-for-two-years

Think of it as taking out a long-term mortgage to pay off our high energy bills over the short term.

But when this was suggested by the Government, around April, all hell broke lose.  It is the same idea, just much larger values.

Max68

sienew said:

This exactly explains why targeted support is a better solution though. Give support to those who need it, not to everyone.

I agree but the targeted support "so far" doesn't help enough people.  People earning just above the benefits cap end up with the same support as someone earning £50,000 a year.  I earn £30,000 less than a close friend but we are both receiving the £400.  Plus those in self funding care homes receive nothing because they don't pay a provider direct but their bills go up as the homes bill increases.  I don't know, I have no answers but my concern is the low earners rather than just targeting those on means tested benefits.

sevenhills

If there is enough competition the energy market, it could be like the mortgage market.
So people should be able to get a 1/2/5/10 year fix or a 2% below OFGEM cap.

Sebi_895

I'm in an area where the council ran a collective scheme which I and many benefitted from going on fixed tariffs year on year. But this year they more or less said sorry guys the market is too volatile for us to offer any fixed tariff deals but we will carry on talking to suppliers and advise if at any point in the future they could deliver a potential saving. So now my fixed deal is coming to an end...Like many have said, you make your choice and you could be quids in or you could be quids out.

jimexbox

Max68 said:

sienew said:

This exactly explains why targeted support is a better solution though. Give support to those who need it, not to everyone.

I agree but the targeted support "so far" doesn't help enough people.  People earning just above the benefits cap end up with the same support as someone earning £50,000 a year.  I earn £30,000 less than a close friend but we are both receiving the £400.  Plus those in self funding care homes receive nothing because they don't pay a provider direct but their bills go up as the homes bill increases.  I don't know, I have no answers but my concern is the low earners rather than just targeting those on means tested benefits.

Raise the personal allowance, then make it none beneficial for those in the higher rate tax bracket by lowering when when the 40% kicks in.

This could be implemented quickly and its fair. 

sienew

Max68 said:

sienew said:

This exactly explains why targeted support is a better solution though. Give support to those who need it, not to everyone.

I agree but the targeted support "so far" doesn't help enough people.  People earning just above the benefits cap end up with the same support as someone earning £50,000 a year.  I earn £30,000 less than a close friend but we are both receiving the £400.  Plus those in self funding care homes receive nothing because they don't pay a provider direct but their bills go up as the homes bill increases.  I don't know, I have no answers but my concern is the low earners rather than just targeting those on means tested benefits.

Yes. The previous package was based on predictions much lower than what we are talking now. The lowest income households got really good support whereas it was thought that those just above that would get £400, be able to cut back a a bit and be able to cover the rest themselves. As the price cap increases and continues to increase that no longer works and with every rise the support needs to get wider and wider (probably tiered still). When I say targeted support it could be quite widely targeted but even if we target the lowest 70% even that's better than targeting everyone (the top 30% probably use 10x the energy of the bottom 30% anyway).

bristolleedsfan

Scottish Power - deficit fund idea - May 2022
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2022/apr/27/scottish-power-chief-has-a-bright-idea-to-ease-cost-of-living-crisis

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/energy-boss-calls-1000-discount-26910029

"If we leave the price at £2,900, debt levels are going to go through the roof because people will just be unable to pay."

jak22

As well as those on variable already nervous about prices, the rest on fixed will be getting nervous too not being considered by these headline grabbing schemes. Increasing the £400, removing VAT, limiting the increase to the cap to what was expected months ago, all are fairer to fixed. There's no need to create a scheme that's unfair.

Max68

jimexbox said:

Raise the personal allowance, then make it none beneficial for those in the higher rate tax bracket by lowering when when the 40% kicks in.

This could be implemented quickly and its fair. 

If you are talking about tax personal allowances that's my point.   The standard Personal Allowance is £12,570.  Liz Truss's idea of cutting income tax etc does nothing to help those who earn under the allowance and does very little to help a lot of those on the basic rate.  What if you earn £8000, £11000, £15000, the current help doesn't touch the sides.  The water companies for instance (although they keep it quiet) offer a social tariff to anyone earning less than £16000 a year.  You can't even compare Council Tax because someone in a Band D house may earn £14000 whereas their next door neighbour may earn £30000.  That's all I am saying, the government can't just keep assuming that the vulnerable are only those on benefits.