Peter Lilley MP: ‘Rising costs borne disproportionately by the less well off, the elderly and the vulnerable’
London, 11 December: A new report published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation reveals the extraordinary £319 billion cost of Britain’s Climate Change Act.
The report, which is based entirely on official figures, exposes the mischievous attempts by ministers to try and disguise the true cost to households.
“Britain has been gulled by false assurances that decarbonising our economy would be costless into signing up to a stupendous bill of over £300 billion up to 2030,” said Peter Lilley MP, the study’s author and one of the few Members of Parliament who voted against the Act back in 2008.
“Hardly anyone in Westminster is aware of this even though it is more than double the cost of HS2, Heathrow and Hinckley put together. Yet so far it has not reduced our ‘carbon footprint’ as we have outsourced our carbon emissions to developing countries such as China. Described by the PM’s special adviser as ‘an act of self harm’, our climate change policies are harming our standard of living, our jobs and our industry.”
The report details the huge burden on every household, explaining how numerous devices have been used to hide the real price of decarbonisation, which is rising at a rapid rate.
Peter Lilley warns that the Government can no longer be complacent about the rising cost of Britain’s unilateral climate policies, particularly in light of Theresa May’s expressed priority of supporting ‘just about managing’ families. After all, these costs “are borne disproportionately by the less well off, the elderly and the vulnerable.”
These wasted billions won’t stop the lights going out.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/11/britain-facing-energy-crisis-could-could-see-families-pay-extra/
Jarryd that’s the chief scientist of the democratic republic of Australia who claimed that , be carefull.
Actually, not only him. There are a staggering number of people in Australia who believe a tax on energy will make it cheaper and provide jobs.
I guess the number of people who believe electricity gets cheaper by taxing the crap out of it is proportionate to the number of village idiots squared .
And meanwhile the UK government are subsidising just one nuclear lower plant to the tune of £60 billion, a cost likely to rise once building starts. This cost will be transferred to the consumer. As an extra much of the building programme will be carried out by Chinese governments supported by the French. You just could not make it up.
Yes, everyone from Greenpeace to Christopher Booker and the editorial teams of the Times, Mail and guardian are against Hinkley.
Uniquely opposed by left, right centre green and skeptic…
Never mind, EDF and Areva will go broke as soon as they start building it.
Griff, didn’t you forget your Arctic Sea Ice Extent graph?
“Griff, didn’t you forget your Arctic Sea Ice Extent graph?”
Did a Polar Bear eat it ??
Bullet proof ‘Brexit’ was right!
Peter Lilley MP: ‘Rising costs borne disproportionately by the less well off, the elderly and the vulnerable’
The Climate Change Act is the single most effective item of UK parliamentary legislation in the last 300 years at transferring money from the poor to the rich.
Why?, because the poor pay the subsidies which are presented to the land owning rich…
I am elderly in England with a house. Our energy provider says for two of us this year we can expect to pay £935 for gas and electricity. The government has contributed a £200 Winter fuel payment.to help us with that. Gasoline is £1.16 a litre but I do not think that is a green tax. I do not feel burdened, is this all yet to come?
When I went to work at the CEGB some 30 years ago the mantra that was repeated day in and out was that electricity cannot be stored and has to be produced as needed. I remember that they had timetables predicting daily consumption of electricity . In drawing up their daily predictions they looked at the television schedules including the commercial breaks when more electricity was needed because people went to the loo or put on their electric kettles to make a cup of tea. They had their forecast of electricity usage in Britain down to a fine art. I only worked there a couple of years but I often wondered how come the green zealots managed to overcome so much knowledge and experience to push their agenda. Surely the there was some resistance from the engineers and managers ?
Th’ electricity cannot be stored’ argument is the one argument I use that is successful in persuading people of the inviability of the so-called renewable sources. It pains me to see how stupid the average Briton has become over the past fifty years and how much knowledge, and experience of the production and generation of energy has been jettisoned because of the green agenda.
The end around came from politicos with lots of public money and some not-ready-for-prime time technology. Details and professionalism do not fit in with that scenario.
Audits can be devastating for dreamers and schemers.
If only there was some way for this 300 billion to be diverted back to the British public. Sigh.
I’m sorry for all the people of Britain who are forced to believe in such silly theory that global warming is happening because of the CO2. If the former is awarded the Nobel Prize to deceive and lie, that award should be immediately assigned to those who invented the CO2 as the main culprit of climate change. 300 billion pounds or euros, is so great suspicion that a country of 50 million inhabitants should be spent per 6000 pounds per capita.
Here I offer a solution. For only 0.03% of the 300 billion, I will save 299 billion and you will see that it is not CO2, but tycoon policy, which does not spare his people, only to enrich individuals, but are not aware that their life expectancy as well as those robbed citizens.