2013-05-18T06:03:39-04:00 Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=luciana-berger Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Luciana Berger Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2249357 2012-12-06T05:11:19-05:00 2012-12-07T11:52:56-05:00

Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luciana-berger/
Yet figures published this week showing that global carbon emissions from industry have risen 2.6% over the past year, along with the increase in extreme weather events like Hurricane Sandy, huge flooding in Brazil, China and Australia and super typhoons, mean that while climate change may not always be front page news, the urgent need to tackle it remains.

When Labour was in government Britain led the way during similar international climate change conferences and signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. During the 13 years that followed, the urgent need to tackle global warming and build a low carbon economy remained a priority.

Thanks to this record of progress at home, UK ministers were able to play a key role in previous climate negotiations abroad, challenging other countries to match the action we ourselves were taking.

We were the first nation to put climate change at the heart of the G8 and to call a UN Security Council meeting on climate change. While domestically Labour passed the Climate Change Act - a world first, legally binding the UK Government to reduce carbon emissions by a third by 2020 and by 80% by 2050. We also doubled renewable energy generation and established Britain as a world leader in offshore wind capacity.

This year is different. Despite the hopeful rhetoric, the ministers and officials who flew out to Doha this week know they are leaving behind a government that is deeply divided over climate change policy. Whether it's John Hayes and Ed Davey's clash over wind farms, George Osborne's dash for gas or David Cameron vetoing the appoint of a new DECC permanent secretary (because he was seen to be 'too green'), the Prime Minister's pledge to lead the 'greenest government ever' is lying in tatters.

This division not only risks jobs and growth that should be in this country going overseas - investment in clean energy has fallen by more than half in the UK since this Government came to power - it also restricts ministers' room for manoeuvre during this week's negotiations.

How, for example, can Energy Secretary Ed Davey ask other countries to decarbonise their energy generation, when (unlike Ed Milliband who was the first party leader to commit to doing so) he can't promise to do the same?

And is it realistic to expect Conservative Minister Greg Barker to be taken seriously when calling for the EU to commit to reducing its carbon emissions 30% by 2020, after Conservative MEPs voted against this in the European Parliament last year?

Despite the lack of fanfare surrounding Doha, there is still much that can be achieved with the right leadership. So what is needed is for ministers to present a united front at the conference.

At the end of this year the original commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol finishes. The bare minimum outcome needed from the conference is a finalised agreement to a second protocol period. This was agreed to in principle last year at the Durban conference, but the detailed negotiations as to how long a second period will last and the size of individual countries' budgets have been left until now.

While an extension of Kyoto isn't perfect - it still falls far short of the badly needed global agreement that is crucial to limiting the growth in the earth's temperature to 2 degrees - let's hope this can be achieved. A second commitment period is vital to bridging the gap until a global agreement can (hopefully) be agreed by 2015. But be in no doubt, our Government's deep divisions over climate change and the low carbon economy makes achieving this harder not easier.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1448070 2012-04-24T19:00:00-04:00 2012-04-25T07:24:51-04:00

Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luciana-berger/ setback to the next. On the one side is the Tea Party tendency in the Tory Party - those Tory MPs who don't believe in climate change, or don't think it's worth bothering about. For them, attacking the Green Deal is just another way of undermining efforts to cut our carbon emissions and proves how out of touch they are with families struggling with soaring energy bills.

On the other side are ministers responsible for the Green Deal, who are just as out of touch with ordinary families affected by the cost of living crisis, and don't seem to understand that unless serious improvements are made to the scheme, the public just won't want to take it up. They dismiss anyone who wants to improve the Green Deal, to make it a better deal for the public, as talking down the scheme - when in reality, of course, exactly the opposite is true. The real champions of the Green Deal are those of us who are trying to improve it and make it a good deal.

Labour wants the Green Deal to succeed. We had a pay-as-you-save scheme in our manifesto, and it was the last Labour government who initiated pilot programmes to test the scheme. If done properly, a pay-as-you-save energy efficiency scheme could create jobs, lower bills for families and cut carbon emissions.

Instead of trying to force it on to the public, ministers should focus on improving the Green Deal to make it as attractive as possible, delivers savings for hard-pressed bill payers and offers real incentives so millions of people want to take it up.

And it's not just Labour saying this. In recent months the CBI, Which?, the Federation of Masters Builders, the Construction Products Association, Green Alliance and even the Government's own advisors, the Committee on Climate Change, have warned the Green Deal will fail without significant improvements. Unfortunately, right now it seems that the government isn't in the mood to listen.

Climate Change Minister Greg Barker dismisses anyone who raises concerns as scaremongers. But the reality is that however good the Green Deal looks on paper, the current proposals aren't up to delivering in practice. Changes need to be made. The government should take its head out of the sand, listen to these voices and work with all of us to ensure the scheme delivers the positive outcome we all want to see.

Most importantly consumers need to be offered affordable rates of interest on Green Deal loans. This is absolutely crucial to making the scheme a success. Polling conducted by the Great British Refurb Campaign found that only 7% of homeowners would be interested in taking up the Green Deal if the interest rate is 6% or above.

Yet worryingly a report by environmental think tank E3G says that relying on commercial loans - as the government plans - will mean interest rates as high as 8%. While modelling by London-based home improvement firm, Crystal shows that even with a 5% interest rate, measures taken out under the Green Deal would cost twice as much over the lifetime of a plan, compares with paying for them upfront.

Finance at these kinds of rates won't be attractive to most people, limiting demand and leaving the Green Deal struggling to get off the ground.

One solution is the Green Investment Bank. The government announced last year that one of the priorities for the Bank is to provide support for the Green Deal, but they haven't specified what form that will take. It's vital that any capital made available is used to secure affordable, attractive interest rates for consumers, in order to lower the cost of Green Deal packages.

Also small businesses should be allowed to complete with bigger companies on a level playing field.

Labour's vision for the Green Deal is one where small businesses, co-operatives, local authorities, charities and social enterprises are able to compete alongside the big six and other large companies that want to take part in the scheme.

The proposals in the government's consultation currently restrict full access to the Energy Company Obligation (ECO), which will provide subsidy for energy efficiency measures, to the Big Six energy companies.

These proposals not only limit smaller providers from competing on a level playing field across the whole Green Deal market, they also further entrench the dominance of the big six in our energy market. Labour wants to see the Green Deal open to all types and sizes of providers by allowing equal access to the ECO.

And lastly, extra support for the fuel poor.

While under the last Labour government the number of houses in fuel poverty fell by one million between 1996 and 2009, soaring energy prices since, means more people are at risk of being fuel poverty. Yet despite this the government plans to offer three times as much support to households who can afford to improve their homes than to help those in fuel poverty.

Nick Clegg announced in a recent speech that the government was adopting Labour's proposal to expand the ECO to include homes with hard to treat cavity walls and that the government was considering 'ways to provide more targeted support for the lowest income homes'. A figure of an extra £190 million for this was touted in his speech, but no specifics were confirmed. The ECO is crucial to the success of the Green Deal and ministers urgently need to finalise its design.

Labour believes the funding from the ECO should be split equally between fuel poor homes and hard to treat homes, with a focus on low income hard to treat homes, over able to pay households. This would drive carbon reduction while ensuring that we put those who need help most, first.

With time running out until the Green Deal launches, the government needs to end the uncertainty, stop the infighting and focus instead on developing a credible way to deliver new jobs and lower energy bills.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1120992 2011-11-30T19:00:00-05:00 2011-12-01T04:51:19-05:00

Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luciana-berger/
In October the BBC announced a series of budget cuts to their TV, radio and online services. There are many casualties of the 'delivering quality first' review, none more tragic than the 2,000 people who will lose their jobs.

To a large extent the BBC is in a difficult place. Reforms have to be made after the corporation received a licence fee freeze that is due to last until 2017.

Unfortunately BBC management have exacerbated these difficulties by producing a set of reductions which are in some places fundamentally unfair. In doing so they are hitting local radio the hardest.

Severely reducing the output of the 39 local radio stations across the country would be a huge loss to our communities. 7 million people listen to their local BBC radio service across the UK and 2 million of these listen to no other BBC radio station.

We all see local radio's value in emergencies, like flooding or the riots during the summer. If it is gone we will lose a vital service which reflects, celebrates and affirms countless local identities across the country.

The feeling from those I talk to who work at the BBC is that local radio is being set up to lose its audience, so that it can be scrapped completely at the next licence fee settlement.

I sincerely hope this isn't the case. As a Liverpool MP I see the real value of local radio every day.

For many people BBC Radio Merseyside is the voice of our local community, and is home to of some of Liverpool's most famous institutions - like the Roger Phillips show, Billy Butler show and others. It is also hugely successful and is the most popular local BBC station outside of London, with 312,000 listeners who on average tune in for a staggering 16.2 hours a week.

Yet the station will be one of the worst hit by the changes and will see its staffing funding reduced by 20%.

Radio Merseyside is run on a shoestring compared to the larger BBC services. As the majority of expenditure at the station is on fixed costs like buildings, any budget reduction of this size cannot be made without the loss of locally produced shows and cutting jobs.

Given this, it's strange that no cuts will be made to Radio 4, which has an annual budget of £99 million - larger than many commercial stations. And with 66% of the licence fee being spent on TV, it is hard to understand why funding for BBC One has only been cut by 3%. I just don't believe it isn't possible to find savings from these significantly larger budgets.

For example You and Yours, a one hour show aired five days a week on Radio Four has more people working on it than the entire staff component of Radio Merseyside. Is the BBC really saying we can't find any savings at all from that programme? It just doesn't add up.

In times like these, when money is tight it's only right that the BBC looks at where it can reduce its costs. But it is just as important that this is done in a way that is fair and protects local services and jobs where possible. Currently they aren't as 280 of the 380 jobs scheduled to be lost in the English regions, will come from local radio.

These cuts are simply wrong, hitting one of the most efficient parts of the BBC the hardest. I hope Mark Thompson will think again.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.959938 2011-09-13T19:00:00-04:00 2011-09-13T19:01:24-04:00

Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luciana-berger/
In July, uSwitch published research showing that 6.3m homes are paying 10% or more of their household income towards their energy bills. That means almost a quarter of all households (24%) find it difficult to afford their gas and electricity bills.

These figures should be a wake-up call to the nation. Fuel poverty has historically been an abstract concept to most of us. Now it's become a mainstream concern. Most worryingly, the uSwitch figures don't take into account the huge price rises announced over the summer by five out of the 'big six' energy companies. When these rises hit household budgets, well over a quarter could be struggling to stay warm during the winter months.

This issue particularly affects people who rent their homes. There are an estimated 680,000 private rented properties in England with the worst energy efficiency ratings of F and G; over 40 per cent of these households live in fuel poverty.

The vast majority of these homes can be insulated at a relatively low cost. Research by the Energy Saving Trust shows that 37 per cent of F or G rated private rented homes could be improved to a minimum standard of Band E for less than £900, through cheap measures like loft and cavity wall insulation and draught proofing. The overwhelming majority (74%) would cost less than £3500.

The case for introducing a new minimum standard is therefore particularly strong. It is estimated that it could lift 150,000 households out of fuel poverty, cut an average of £488 per year from the energy bill of the homes improved and save 1.87 million tonnes of CO2.

After pressure from Labour in Parliament during earlier stages of the Energy Bill the Government committed to introducing minimum standards in the private rented sector by 2018. While this is a step in the right direction, as it stands, the legislation is still too slow to come into force more than six years away.

The UK has a target of eliminating fuel poverty by 2016. It seems more than sensible then that a minimum standard should come into force in time to contribute to meeting that goal. More importantly the thousands of those who will be left shivering under blankets in order to stay warm this coming winter cannot afford to wait longer.

This problem can be easily rectified. Labour has tabled proposals which would mean that minimum standards would come in to force in 2016. The government should build on the progress that has been made and pass these amendments at report stage.
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.949066 2011-09-05T08:00:47-04:00 2011-11-05T05:12:03-04:00

Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luciana-berger/ a confidential memo on green policies, written by a No 10 advisor, reveals deep divisions at the heart of government over energy prices and climate change. It's also the second time in less than a week that energy secretary Chris Huhne has been attacked by Conservatives as on Wednesday, MEP Roger Helmer wrote a scathing article.

While the behind the scenes squabbles of the coalition parties might generate interest in the Westminster bubble, the real concern for the rest of the country is how to cope with the rapidly rising cost of energy.

Over the past few months five out of the six major energy companies have raised their prices by around a fifth. This is big hit to household budgets, already being squeezed to breaking point by frozen wages and rising costs.

At a time when industry experts argue that it costs our energy companies less to supply us than it did three years ago, during the financial crisis, it's a struggle to understand why all of us are paying these exorbitant prices.

Faced with this the Government simply isn't doing enough to support those struggling to make ends meet. Chris Huhne may not directly control the price of energy, but there are still things he can do right now to lower our bills.

Firstly, we need to fundamentally reform our energy market.

Right now just six providers supply 99% of the energy consumed by UK households. It is clear that this is no longer working for the consumer. The system is broken and it needs to change.

Labour leader Ed Miliband has called for an end to the dominance of Britain's 'big six' energy companies. Real competition is needed in the market to drive down prices. Opening up the market to new entrants will lead to more innovation and lower bills for all of us.

There is no doubt that we face significant challenges in guaranteeing our future energy security and moving to low carbon sources of energy. That's why we can't afford to carry on tinkering at the edges. We need real reform and a focus on ensuring affordable bills in the long term.

Secondly, we need clearer bills and 100% transparency on how they are calculated.

Currently our gas and electric bills are a mixture of strange tables, numbers and different costs, leaving most of us wondering how the final price has been arrived at. With simpler bills, huge price rises can't be hidden and consumers could for once genuinely be able to shop around to ensure they are getting the best deal.

And thirdly, we need to address the record rise in fuel poverty.

In July, uSwitch published research showing that a record 6.3m homes are now in fuel poverty paying 10% or more of their income to heat their home. Most worryingly, these figures don't take into account the huge price rises announced this summer. When these are factored in we could soon find well over a quarter of us will be struggling to keep warm this forthcoming winter.

Over the past year this Government has been systematically removing support for fuel-poor households, from scrapping Labour's Warm Front scheme, which provided 21st-century heating, to cutting winter fuel payments by up to £100.

The Government has said it will provide support for the fuel poor with its energy efficiency programme the Green Deal. It's a pay as you save scheme, with the cost of installing measures to reduce energy paid for out of the savings made on bills. The scheme is currently severely delayed in parliament, amid criticism of its viability. These criticisms were echoed in the No 10 memo today, so households up and down the country should not expect help anytime soon.

Instead of standing back minsters should be taking urgent action to curb soaring prices. Labour's approach would mean a real change - more competition, fairer bills, transparent pricing and extra support for those who need it. The Government's dithering and inaction is hitting households now and risking our future energy security. It's time for action.
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.909638 2011-07-26T11:03:17-04:00 2011-09-25T05:12:01-04:00

Luciana Berger http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luciana-berger/ growth figures showing the economy grew just 0.2% in the last quarter are very worrying. It confirms that George Osborne's austerity plan simply isn't working. The government needs a Plan B.

The Chancellor should have built upon the solid 1.2% second quarter growth he inherited from Labour last year. Instead he is cutting too far and too fast - hitting families, costing jobs and making it much harder to get the deficit down. We're already borrowing £46 billion more than was expected this year.

Labour's balanced deficit plan would focus on creating jobs, supporting businesses and fostering innovation. Of course we need tough decisions on tax and spending cuts, but the fastest way to get the deficit down is to combine sensible spending reductions with solid economic growth.

It's not just Labour calling for the Government to change course. In June, 52 of the UK's leading economists called for a plan B. They said the Chancellor's economic policies were 'self-defeating' and is 'likely to result in a lot more pain and a lot less gain'.

They called for a 'strategy for sustainable growth'. One part of this suggested plan was to focus on the low carbon economy - something this Government hasn't done.

It's estimated that over £100 billion will be spent on renewables and clean energy across the globe next year alone. Ministers should be providing the market certainty for green businesses to invest in the British economy. If they do, hundreds of thousands of jobs could be created, increasing revenues and driving growth as a result.

Instead of providing certainty, the Government has withdrawn support. Cutting 40% of the Carbon Trust's funding of green R&D, dithering over the Green Investment Bank, and unexpectedly removing Feed-in-Tariff incentives for solar power, making medium scale school, hospital and community projects unviable. A move which Howard Johns, chairman of the Solar Trade Association, said will cripple the UK's fledgling solar industry.

As a result of this approach, industry has lost confidence in Minister's ability to manage the low carbon economy.

In Ernst & Young's latest quarterly survey, only 8% of renewable industry professionals said that they were optimistic that the Government would establish the conditions for success in the next 12 months.

A good industrial policy gives entrepreneurs and investors the confidence, certainty and support to establish and grow businesses. This Tory-led Government has done the opposite and now we are going backwards.

In March, a report by the respected US Pew Environment Group showed the UK fell from being third in the world in green growth investment, to only 13th place, over the past year. This means we now rank behind emerging economies such as Brazil, India and China.

The report blamed this fall down on "a sharp decline in offshore wind energy investments and uncertainty surrounding [government] policy".

In the wind sector, we were once a world leader. Now we have been overtaken by countries such as Denmark, which has won half of the global market in wind turbines, boosting the Danish exchequer by £2.7 billion a year.

Other countries are powering ahead. We can't afford to miss out. For example, a recent report in the Financial Times suggested that in the same week that the Chinese premier was in London signing trade deals worth $2.2 billion, China and Germany signed trade deals on carbon capture technology and electric vehicles worth about $15 billion.

In the face of this decline, where is the plan to bolster tax receipts by encouraging low carbon start ups, fostering innovation and creating jobs in high tech manufacturing? The government doesn't have one.

The Government's 'Plan for Growth' released on the same day as the Budget, treated green growth as an afterthought. The document is 126 pages long but just three of them were dedicated to the low carbon economy.

We were promised the 'Green Economy Roadmap'. Don't worry if you've not heard of it, I've spoken to government ministers who haven't either. We are still waiting for it.

Business minister Mark Prisk has been talking about this joint BIS, DECC and DEFRA initiative since last autumn. It was meant to be published in April. Now it's nearly August and we still don't have it. It's incredible that after more than a year this government has been unable to publish any strategy for building a British green economy.

This needs to change and it needs to change quickly. It's not right that hardworking tax payers have to pay the cost of government ministers squandering opportunities to create jobs and build the industries of the future.

While in government, Labour introduced the Climate Change Act in 2008 to enshrine carbon targets in law, and to move Britain from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy. We planned to achieve 40 per cent low-carbon electricity by 2020, and to create thousands of new jobs and apprenticeships in green businesses.

Today's figures show that the Chancellor needs to think again. He should adopt Labour's plans for a temporary cut in VAT to get the economy growing strongly again. Alongside this we need a proper plan for green growth. By unleashing a green revolution for skills and jobs, we could get our economic recovery back on track.
]]>