[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Tin Monkey

You need to tell the full story so that people can make an informed opinion for themselves. Are you a prospective politician yourself?

The idea is that energy companies will have to ensure that people on low incomes are on the most economic tariff available, as many people don't follow the different 'plans' available on energy prices. I don't qualify for any kind of initiative and always miss out, as I'm in the hardest hit demographic group.

You’re right. I should have told the full story. But I left something out deliberately so that others could come back with the details and thus make a meaningful contribution to the thread rather than just taking a sly dig at me.

The object of this deplorable exercise, which you have got wrong, is that, in theory, it will affect those people on benefits who spend more than 10% of their income on gas and electric. Once identified the energy companies are then supposed to target those people so that they can make their homes more energy efficient with grants and to offer them the lowest tariff.

There is a major snag in this, in that the lowest tariff is being supplied with gas and electricity from the same company and opting for monthly DD. The most controllable tariff from the viewpoint of the customer on benefits is the pre-paid meter, which is the most expensive. It has been quoted that on average the difference between the two extremes is around £150 per year, or if you like about £3 per week.

Not too long ago one of my grandchildren was made redundant and the mortgage interest on the house that she was buying became unserviceable. Thus she had to sell up at a loss and rent a house. This rented house had pre-paid meters already installed and the energy company refused to change them to a cheaper tariff. We can only guess why but I’m willing to bet that it was all down to cash up front to the energy company with a pre-payment meter rather than payment in arrears as with a quarterly meter.

The other problem is that I should imagine that the majority of people on benefits are in rented accommodation so they won’t be eligible for a grant. It would be up to the landlord to go down that road.

The energy company will know which of their customers spends how much on their energy bill but they won’t know their income or its source. On the other hand the government will know what benefits a particular person gets but will not know how much they spend on energy. To ensure that the energy company gets all the information it requires to adhere to the government initiative the government will have to reveal the benefit income details of EVERYONE on benefits whether they spend 10% of their income on energy or not.

Apart from all that would anyone be happy that a private company knows their income and its source?

Maybe this is the government getting revenge on the electorate for forcing the disclosure of their second home expenses?

Finally to answer your puerile question – At 71 and at best not in the best of health and at worst I shouldn’t be here, not being a cheat and a liar I have no designs on becoming a politician.