Extending the EPG at its current level for the 3 months April-June 2023 - For or Against?

What_time_is_it

...and why?

ariarnia

i dont no about this one. we are coming off a fix 1 april so from a selfish view id like the current cap to stay as it means less of a jump for us. but at the same time we can manage with the price jump even with another 20% so... 

theres a lot of people who are worried and struggling. (and before anyone says that includes lots of people who dont qualify for the help because they cant navigate the benifit system or are just not quite eligible for the help/just above the cut of). and it still is quite cold some days/nights. and we've had snow in march before. 

so given its cheaper than the gov expected then id like them to keep it where it is BUT i wont have a problem if they dont or if they say it can stay where it is but its staying at that level longer after the price drops to bring back in some of the cash maybe?

Mstty

For the reduction to £3000, against the reduction to £2500

Reasons are From April 1st to end of June these should be low energy usage months so the difference will not be as significant as the media may make out. The higher outdoor temperatures mean less heating and you can turn things down like temperatures on showers and boilers.

With a further reduction of the price cap expected for July below today's prices without any government EPG help there is no need to put loads of taxpayers money in now. Save it for next winter if needed.

Alnat1

+1 for what @Mstty said.

brewerdave

As per ariarnia post above ,I'm on a fix on gas til July 24 ,so my increase would be very limited and on a fix til end of May 23 on leccy, so I can stand the increase til July. Perhaps HMG could settle some of the pay disputes instead of putting more into energy support !!

armistice

+1 for what @Mstty said.

RavingMad

The price cap has dropped £1000, keep the EPG at £2500 if it's predicted that we'll no longer require it by Q3 and there'll be fixed tariffs entering the market 

It'll be a good headline for the Tories and it won't cost them as much as previously thought. 

matelodave

I'm with @Mstty on this, the EPG gave us all some breathing space over the winter but most people (me included) will see a dramatic decrease in our energy consumption from April onwards, so it gives us all a bit of time to sort out our heating and put some away for next winter. 

Just keep giving away money doesn't actually encourage people to get a bit more energy conscious, it just means they can use the same amount and not pay the going rate.

When stuff ,whether its leccy, gas or baked beans gets expensive, we suddenly find that we can do with a bit less. Whilst everything gets subsidised we all pay, and people's habits don't change because they don't have to. In a perverted way it just increases prices because someone else pays the difference.

For those who seem to totally unaware of how it works -  the "Government" doesn't actually have any money, whatever anyone thinks - its ours, taken in taxes so we all end up paying for it (or our kids and grandkids will) for the next fiftly years, most of which will go on interest for the loans that they've taken out to pay it.

I dont expect that many people will agree, but its basic economics, if you spend more than you earn, you end up in debt and have to borrow money and pay interest on the loan which which makes you even poorer.

dunstonh

For the reduction to £2,500.

1) Late Summer last year, many people looked at ways to reduce their energy use over winter.   That was evident in the posts in this section.    However, once the Government announced the EPG and other support, much of that energy-saving effort disappeared.   Most people didn't have to save energy any more as middle and higher earners would be taxed to pay for it (but not the highest earners as they were being taxed out of the UK and overall revenue is going down).  We had people dropping from 20kWh a day energy use to around 10kWh but now people could be lazy and carry on wasting energy.   There was no incentive for people to find ways to reduce their energy use.   Just untargeted handouts/support from the state with no incentive.

2)  Autumn was very mild overall.  Winter has been so far too.  Most parts of the country are still in drought, which if it continues, would be a second year in a row and devasting for many who won't get any support.   However, that mild weather has meant that energy use has been lower than normal on a like-for-like basis with a cold year.    So, most households haven't really suffered any catastrophic cost.  

3) April to June are warmer months.  Heating will be low or off.   Lighter nights means less lighting.    

4)  Middle earners and small businesses are being crucified to pay for it.     The UK has one of the lowest tax regimes for low earners in Europe.  Yet it has one of the highest for middle earners.   It was published earlier in that year that for the first time ever, more than half of households take more from the Government than they pay in taxes.    The middle earning cashpoint machine is running on empty.     (that will take more overhaul than the EPG level but its a trend that doesnt end well).

MuckChucker

As is becoming the norm, I agree with @Mstty for most BUT there are people who are struggling/amassing debt now to pay for energy. We'll be fine, we've managed our useage really well, we can stretch a bit more and the end is in sight. I'm happy to pay a bit extra so those in proper need get the help they need - how the hell do you even go about setting up such a system though????

EssexHebridean

I'm mostly against the headlines that are creating panic around this - as those are doing more damage than the actual increase itself will. There is a good basis to say that in fact the costs of the EPG will have dropped so dramatically over what was assumed that they would be when it was first put into place, that in fact it could easily be maintained at the same level as currently and would still be costing the country far less than was budgeted for. If there was a way of targeting the lowered level to those who generally need the support, then I'd be in favour of that happening, but as established already, there simply isn't a practical way of doing that.  (It's frustrating to be reading about the number of people who have just received the alternative fuels payment who really shouldn't qualify for it (and more to the point, don't need it!), but again, I can understand why it's happened!) 

Ultimately by April it's to be hoped that most folk are at least using their heating far less, even if it's still on at all which for many, it won't be. Similarly even the costs of lighting, cooking etc tend to fall at that stage in the year too - more daylight, people are happy to eat more salad type meals and that sort of thing, so the overall effect of the increase in prices will be minimal - the risk is whether some suppliers will see "20% increase in prices" and insist on putting DD amounts up without actually assessing whether that is needed on a customer by customer basis. 

Above all I'd like to see a drive to push the media to a more responsible level of reporting around these issues - rather than "everyone is going to be paying £500 more for energy!" or worse "the new price cap is going to be over £700 above the level people are currently paying" which without the qualifying facts, are both no better than click-bait. I rather fear that suggesting that the UK mainstream media might consider being more responsible and fact-led is just more pie in the sky, though!