There is one hard truth: the fossil-fuel giants will not save us.
Energy shocks don’t just raise our energy bills – they can be turning points in how our economy runs, says @chaitanyakumar.bsky.social in @theguardian.com
www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
Another crisitunity moment faces us - a clear choice between regressing to the old energy system that might feel comfortable or move rapidly to a new energy system that is challenging but is a more befitting response to the crisis.
Op-ed by me in the guardian. 👇👇 www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
#GAevent 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸: join us and a panel of experts one month on from the start of the latest oil and gas crisis to unpack the instability and what it means for the cost of living in the UK.
📅 1 April, 12:00–13:00 | Online
Ends with attacking nigel farage and talks of wanting to go back into the EU one day in the future.. and states unequivocally that Brexit was a horrible idea.
On tackling the welfare bill - he disagrees that the bill is spiralling out of control. Goes back to basics and says this is an essential safety net and we shouldn't strip it away. Highlights the value of things like universal food access for kids in London as a good example of what a safety net is.
On BoE, zack calls for no more increases on interest rates. Goes back to challenging the OBR /HMT dynamic. More on the background to his arguments here
share.google/xwEryIxrO0DW...
An explicit question to zack on whether he is a proponent of modern monetary theory - gives a good response to say he's a pragmatist and not an ideologue. Doubles down on borrowing to investment as good. Focuses on what's needed now like public ownership of water, wealth tax etc. Phew!
On the notion of economic growth itself - he says what we are measuring and calling growth is all wrong. Quotes mazzucatos work on missions and states that growth cannot be a mission, it's a positive side effect but missions should be tackling big challenges like the climate breakdown.
On a q about the Greens just wanting to print money, he suggests his tax policies will raise a lot of money. Also says borrowing for investment is good. He loves the idea of fiscal multipliers and goes back to it again and again.
In response to dealing with youth unemployment, he speaks of opportunities in the green economy.
On legalising drugs, he speaks of high drug deaths in the UK and suggests civil service actually proposed legalising to Rachel reeves but she ignored it. Attacks Starmer on de basing the conversation.
Hannah peaker from @neweconomics.bsky.social asks about whether he would also call for guaranteeing essential energy for all households. See more to the background on that here share.google/NoJLZcrp2S5C...
He goes on to challenge the OBR. It's origins had sound rationale but look at the state of the economy today, the original objectives haven't been met. He cited @neweconomics.bsky.social work on reforming obr as one of the options to seriously consider. share.google/mLjw07cQNMgD...
"the govt. should change these failing fiscal rules" and introduce fiscal referees instead.
This is welcome. See more here - neweconomics.org/2024/09/calling-time-on-fiscal-rules share.google/6ycOAuiK0yE9...
"stop equating government finances with a household". Hallelujah!
Cites the recent Ifs report that states the existing fiscal framework is dysfunctional (they suggest a traffic light system instead of spurious preciseness of fiscal forecasts)
He goes on to call for rent controls in Britain. "stop the chokeholds of rip off rents"!
"let's end private ownership of water" and bring water into public hands. Another clear demand and very very popular.
He then calls to cut the ability of gas plants to set the market price for electricity!
Makes a clear warning about AI. He notes it's potential for good but highlights the huge economic, climate and labour market impacts of unfettered AI deployment.
He attacks the rent seeking billionaires. 1 in 4 billionaires made most of their wealth from property value extraction and inheritance, he says.
His consistency on this message is a big part of his appeal today.
He calls for equivalising CGT with income tax. A wealth tax.
"Rip off Britain". That's his headline framing. British people are being ripped off by every day by energy, water and other utilities. The basics of life are extracted from us and sold back to the public at extortionate prices.
@zackpolanski.bsky.social giving his first major speech on the economy at @neweconomics.bsky.social 's 40th anniversary. Starts off with a call to freeze the price cap at current levels and willing to shield consumers up to a £300 bill rise.
Overall, welcome respite for everybody but network+balancing costs remain a huge worry. Sustained fall in gas prices will also be welcomed but we face a bizzare risk of looking like muppets on the recent CfD contracts if those price drops are big.
Energy policy is now one battle after another!
4. Electricity standing charge has nonetheless gone up- because network costs have increased by £66 a year! RIIO-ET3 will deliver the largest increase in capital spending in recent history, but that also means higher bills. Redistributing the burden of these costs should be top priority.
3. We @neweconomics.bsky.social are calling for the govt. to take this progressivity further and introduce a block tariff system. Standing charges gradually taken off and higher consumption leading to higher bills. It's fair, intuitive and efficient. neweconomics.org/campaigns/na...
2. Martin Lewis has been campaigning against standing charges and the govt. has listened, by moving ~£34 off SC on to unit rates (with a bit more from April '27). This again is welcome and useful to see this acknowledged as a progressive move... which it is. But..
1. Given the complex ways we split costs across gas/elec; unit/standing charges; the distribution effects of today's announcement is varied and relatively regressive. This is useful for those who are asking why the govt. claims a £150 reduction when the price cap saving is only £117.
Good news on the energy price cap. A 7% fall, driven largely by policy decisions and a bit by wholesale prices, is a relief for the govt. and hhlds. It won't stop the incessant attacks on net zero.
A few red/amber flags to watch out for. 👇👇
Recreated this for Britain, no job displacement (yet)!... and besides, too soon to make broad brush statements on losses.
Overall, the case for fiscal framework reform is stronger than ever before. From the OECD to NIESR to now the IFS, many are echoing the same message even if their solutions differ slightly. Read more here - investinbritain.org.uk/resource/the...
The IFS is careful to suggest that their proposed changes should only be introduced in the new parliament or when we are back in current account surplus. Taking the spirit of their own report that one single metric shouldn't define sustainability, we believe reforms need to be brought in sooner.
c. Modernise the “fiscal multipliers” used in official scoring. Current multipliers are dated- often too low and assumed to fade to zero after 5 years (right when fiscal rules bite). This bakes in a bias against productive spending and can force unnecessary cuts. neweconomics.org/2024/10/the-...
b. Reform the OBR’s role from rule “referee” to a principles-guided fiscal policy adviser - reshape OBR leadership into something like a Fiscal Policy Committee with broader expertise.
Replace rigid pass/fail judgments with recommendations for an appropriate range of fiscal stances/borrowing.