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

Mike360

savers_united said:

Mike360 said:

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

Answer: The freeze won't happen. The Tory's won't back a Labour proposal. So any further help (if it happens) would be by other means.

I am on a Green Energy price fix and am not concerned by what Labour said they would do.

The windfall tax was a labour proposal, the cut to Vat was a labour proposal, bit of a theme developing. 

If it starts to gain traction like the windfall tax then I do see the Tories offering something similar but packaging it differently, it would save all the other handouts that are being given if its bundled into one freeze on the cap, the overall cost would not be massively different as more support is needed anyway. It would also have benefits of reduced fraud and abuse of grants that are given.

They were Labour proposals but it took ages for the Torys to come round to the idea, I am sure they tried hard to look at other ways first.  Same will happen here.

What_time_is_it

RobM99 said:

Any fixed rate is a gamble. You're hardly going to a petrol retailer and demand a refund because it went down since you last bought some, are you?. A fix is a good decision at the time with a possible bad outcome.

Fixed and saved money? Well done.
Fixed and lost out? Tough.

We're talking about a basic necessity here - heating. There shouldn't be any element of gambling involved at all.

casjen

Good old Kieth " For god sake someone give me a policy so I can have my face in the media" Starmer... Ill though out, Will not target those most in need...will not encourage people to take control of the useage ... It will catch up with people when it ends and then Armageddon really will hit the great unwashed... The help so far has been exactly right and any new help should be dripped fed through bills such as the  taking of VAT/green taxes and increasing the 66.66 to a £100 for the six months.. People need to realize they are responsible for their lives not anybody else.

The NI increase should stay as that has been somewhat  offset by the allowance increase. If its is removed then the allowance should be dropped back.

Exit fees should be removed  for at least 12 months to allow people to follow the 3 month cap changes better

Ive said before that personal allowance should be unfrozen

The Winter allowance should be permanently increased to £600

Stronger measures should be brought in for those on Job seekers allowance to  "encourage " job take-up... there are plenty about and savings of benefits here redirected to those who are really struggling as against those who are to damn lazy. 

savers_united

Ultrasonic said:

Source? I'm curious how up to date this figure is, as I think we've gone through a period where the proportion on fixed tariffs has gradually been increasing.

There is mention here of 22mil from July,

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/energy-security-bill-factsheets/energy-security-bill-factsheet-default-tariff-price-cap

savers_united

What_time_is_it said:

RobM99 said:

Any fixed rate is a gamble. You're hardly going to a petrol retailer and demand a refund because it went down since you last bought some, are you?. A fix is a good decision at the time with a possible bad outcome.

Fixed and saved money? Well done.
Fixed and lost out? Tough.

We're talking about a basic necessity here - heating. There shouldn't be any element of gambling involved at all.

Everyone is gambling otherwise might as well all stay on the cap and suck it up. People take a fix hoping / gambling that it works out better over the term, often by paying more for a few months that works out cheaper longer term. 

It's part of the way energy works, suppliers gamble by hedging their contracts. If everyone was just put on one rate with no thinking people would call it a monopoly. 

Ultrasonic

savers_united said:

Ultrasonic said:

Source? I'm curious how up to date this figure is, as I think we've gone through a period where the proportion on fixed tariffs has gradually been increasing.

There is mention here of 22mil from July,

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/energy-security-bill-factsheets/energy-security-bill-factsheet-default-tariff-price-cap

Interesting. Thanks for tracking that down. So more than the complete opposite of the July survey here then at around 78% on SVTs vs 70% on fixed tariffs.

Astria

What_time_is_it said:

RobM99 said:

Any fixed rate is a gamble. You're hardly going to a petrol retailer and demand a refund because it went down since you last bought some, are you?. A fix is a good decision at the time with a possible bad outcome.

Fixed and saved money? Well done.
Fixed and lost out? Tough.

We're talking about a basic necessity here - heating. There shouldn't be any element of gambling involved at all.

Heating is only a basic necessity for some, not all, those who are elderly for example, or who have certain medical conditions or disabilities. For others, heating is simply a comfort level which isn't essential - same goes for A/C in the summer.

I remember a few years ago staying in a house that wasn't heated during winter due to a malfunction of the heating system and not being able to afford to fix it. We simply wore enough layers so we kept warm and moved about more. The water pipes did freeze up but they were OK once the weather warmed up a bit.

Actually, that's kind off like what it was when I was growing up - we didn't have central heating back then only an open fire place. Today it's a luxury item.

GingerTim

The two candidates for PM are being awfully quiet in response to Labour's proposal and allowing it a free run in the media - it's almost as if they know they are going to have to row back on their campaign pledges the moment they get in, and do something similar...

Section62

GingerTim said:

The two candidates for PM are being awfully quiet in response to Labour's proposal and allowing it a free run in the media - it's almost as if they know they are going to have to row back on their campaign pledges the moment they get in, and do something similar...

Or that they know sooner or later people will understand the proposal's funding isn't just from a windfall tax on 'fat cat' energy companies, but also on scrapping the £400 each household is expecting to start receiving from October.  A 100% 'windfall tax' on every household's £400 energy bill rebate is not going to be as popular as taxing other people tends to be.

Or the candidates are letting the economists do their work for them -

"But economists warn it's delaying borrowing costs rather than saving them - they say that stopping the subsidy would push up inflation and borrowing costs."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62542541

savers_united

Ultrasonic said:

savers_united said:

Ultrasonic said:

Source? I'm curious how up to date this figure is, as I think we've gone through a period where the proportion on fixed tariffs has gradually been increasing.

There is mention here of 22mil from July,

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/energy-security-bill-factsheets/energy-security-bill-factsheet-default-tariff-price-cap

Interesting. Thanks for tracking that down. So more than the complete opposite of the July survey here then at around 78% on SVTs vs 70% on fixed tariffs.

I think on here you will see more mix or as you say more fixes, but in the wider population between Martin advising to stay on the SVT and various media outlets saying the same along with Energy suppliers sending out renewels with the SVT coming in alot cheaper than the fix being offered at the time I would say that govt figure is reflective of the country as a whole and will be the one they base any decisions on when costing these measures.