Playing the energy tariff switch game?
Last updated on December 28th, 2017 at 08:42 pm
“When the prime ministers only advice for yet another round of increasing energy costs is to switch tariff and wear a jumper, you know that he is as helpless as the rest of us.”
Although there are things you can do to shield yourself from future rises, the prime minister is keeping this information under his hat.
What Mr Cameron should have said was,
“The future of energy within the UK is uncertain, but what is certain is that we cannot guarantee to keep energy down because of a variable factor at home and abroad. Everyone should now begin to look at alternative ways to protect yourselves from the higher costs of future energy in this country.”
When the conservative government of the day, first privatised the energy supply industry, what it was saying at that time was every British Household was a ‘cash cow’ for sale.
The difference between the privatisation of the recent Post Office and the energy sector in the 1980s is that every home needs energy, but not every home requires the Post Office.
For this reason, you are considered a cash cow to the big six energy suppliers. You have no choice, but to use one of the big six, and the ability to switch between companies is only an illusion of choice.
This game of â€˜switching tariffsâ€™ reminds me of the 3 cups and find the ball trick, but with the whole population of the United Kingdom in a game of finding the lowest tariff while the energy companies keep shuffling or changing their offerings around. Weâ€™re never meant to find or beat the system which was cleverly designed to be in the energy suppliers favour.
So this takes me back to David Cameron or more specifically whatâ€™s under his hat?
Mr Cameron could have single-handedly kicked start the solar panel and alternative energy technology revolution in one single speech. With the feed-in tariffs scheme currently in place supporting a fledgeling solar industry through its infancy years, the solution for helping people reduce dependency on increasingly expensive traditional energy costs is already in his government’s arsenal.
So why the hesitance to move into an alternative energy Britain?
Because if Mr Cameron were to lead all the cash cows out of the controlled area of traditional energy and out into the freedom of the greener technological pastures. He would be undoing the privatisation policies of his predecessors and upsetting the shareholders of the big six companies who also happen to fund his political party and plans. Simple!
The illusion of choice
Unfortunately, the energy companies backed by governmental policy want you to chase the lowest tariff like a dog chases its tail. This situation is what is holding most people back from realising they are in a big game of reshuffle. This game of chase the lowest tariff, instigated by private business and now supported by the political policy designed to control the herd.
The logo at the top of your quarterly bill is your brand, and the whole switching process is like a farmer moving cattle from one pen to another, the entire system controlled and only given the illusion of movement and choice.
A recommendation by any government to use alternative methods such as photovoltaic solar panels would see a full paradigm shift which would have a huge impact on the profitability and reduce shareholder dividends significantly. A move no government will or can do because the political arena is funded by energy industry shareholders or beneficiaries. The chancellor George Osborne is influenced by his father-in-law Lord Howell who is the head of a lobbying organisation for big oil and gas companies for example.
The design of the ‘energy tariff shuffle’ con-trick by the big six needn’t come as a shock either. The fact these energy companies don’t want households generating a significant proportion of their energy requirements that would reverse the balance of power would be devastating for them.
Mr Cameron keeping this technological fix under his hat, at a time when people are struggling is a national disgrace. Keeping this advancement and actively sweeping it under the rug for profit at a time of environmental degradation should be criminal especially when you consider that millions will die from its effects.
Mr Cameron has the ability to cause a rush of installations and finally create a national and possibly international revolution in alternative technology take up, but instead, he decided to protect the big six companies shareholders and keep the herds from moving away from their controlled area.
Obviously, not everyone will be able to afford a solar panel installation, but like every technology before it, the trickle-down effect will hopefully allow various income types to benefit and the sooner this happens the better.
If you really want to break free from the herd, then switching to alternative technology is the only permanent way to go, but don’t expect Mr Cameron to tell you this. Solar panels typically benefit their owners for over thirty years. That’s thirty years of pain-free energy bills. You do the maths.