CPS Blog

Dithering ministers saddle us with an energy crunch by Jill Kirby

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 10:12:00 GMT

When I’ve had a difficult day, or if I just need a quiet place to think things over, there’s a remedy that seldom fails: I close the bathroom door, run a hot bath, lie back and let my anxieties evaporate in the gently rising steam. But at 96p a time – compared with 41p just four years ago - this homely pleasure now looks like extravagance.

Maybe I’ll have to settle for a quick shower and find somewhere else to worry about the falling value of my home or the escalating cost of feeding my family.

Last week’s announcement by British Gas of a 35% rise in gas bills, plus 9% on electricity, means that the cost of heating our homes is going to take a big slice out of the average household budget. Gas prices are already up by 60% since 2004, electricity costs have risen by 40% in the same period. For the elderly on fixed incomes, the pain is greatest and the worry about keeping warm will be most acute.

The problem is not confined to pensioners, however, and will not be solved by a £50 top-up to the winter fuel allowance. It is estimated that by Christmas 6m households will be defined as “fuel poor” – spending more than 10% of their income on gas and electricity. The prospect of the government fulfilling its 2001 pledge to eradicate fuel poverty now looks about as likely as Gordon Brown winning the next election.

The government’s reaction to the British Gas announcement follows a pattern that has become all too familiar as its economic woes pile up. First, blame global factors, in particular the price of oil. Then float the possibility of a windfall tax on the supposed culprit. Demands from union leaders for a £500m levy on energy profits to provide handouts for the fuel-poor have already been supported by Conservatives in the Local Government Association and look like an easy hit for a nervous prime minister desperate for support from cash-strapped voters.

The risks attached to penalising energy companies and operating an unpredictable tax regime were underlined on Friday when EDF, the French supplier, unexpectedly pulled out of its projected deal with British Energy. The collapse of the deal, which was intended to provide the UK with a new generation of nuclear power plants, will leave the government with an even bigger energy headache.

It is a headache of the government’s own making. Yes, oil prices do affect the cost of gas, but the biggest driver of domestic energy prices is the UK’s inability to be energy self-sufficient despite rich natural reserves and our one-time world leadership in nuclear power. Our lack of independence leaves us with a looming energy gap as we scrabble for power supplies on the world markets. The gap will yawn wider in the coming few years and will present the next government with an energy crunch that could be even more painful than today’s credit crunch.

Our dependency on gas is at the heart of the problem. As UK natural gas resources dwindle, we are increasingly dependent on gas bought from Europe, Russia and the Middle East. Last year the UK imported 27% of its gas. This year the proportion will rise to 40% and by 2015 is predicted to reach 75%.

The shocking fact is that, due to appalling energy planning, Britain is burning more and more gas to make electricity. Where gas is used directly for heating and cooking it is nearly 100% energy-efficient. But when gas is burnt to generate electricity, it is only 50% efficient, due to the heat lost in the process. At present, nearly 40% of UK electricity is generated by burning gas. Government ministers who scold us for failing to insulate our homes should be reminded of this chronically wasteful use of resources.

Why are we consuming our vital gas reserves in this way? Because this government has spent the past 11 years dithering over its energy policy. Unable to take any decision on nuclear power until its late conversion in 2006, Labour has also been too nervous of the green lobby to agree to new coal-fired power stations. At present, coal provides more than a third of our electricity, with about 20% from nuclear. Wind power accounts for 1%, with about 3% from other renewables, such as hydro and biofuels. Nearly half of our nuclear and coal-fired power stations will be phased out during the next 6-8 years. Even if we can succeed in building the thousands of wind turbines that the government has promised, the inconstancy of wind generation means that they must be backed up by conventional power sources.

Had the EDF nuclear deal gone through, the first of its plants would have been running by 2017. Now who knows how long it will take for another partner to emerge?

As for coal, the most advanced of the plans on offer is at Kingsnorth in Kent, where E.ON wants to build a “cleaner coal” power station. Planning permission has been granted by the local council, but final approval from the government is still awaited and climate change activists are gathering this weekend for a mass protest.

Which way will the Tories jump? Greg Barker, the shadow environment minister, says a Conservative government will provide a “test bed” for carbon capture and storage. E.ON’s assurances that Kingsnorth can be fitted with carbon capture as soon as the technology is available may provide the Tories with sufficient comfort to bless this scheme. But if their carbon capture conditions sound too onerous, power companies may back off from the rest of the replacement coal stations proposed.

David Cameron knows that he cannot risk leaving an energy policy gap. After initial reluctance he has endorsed Labour’s nuclear strategy, but says that his government would refuse to subsidise the industry. Now that this strategy has been dealt a body blow by the EDF withdrawal, it may be wiser for the Tories to keep the door open. Even with the cost of decommissioning, electricity generated by nuclear power is less than half the price of wind.

When the energy crunch comes, Cameron is likely to be in 10 Downing Street. He will have no desire to follow in the footsteps of Edward Heath and be forced to order national power blackouts. I might have to give up those long hot baths – but I draw the line at cleaning my teeth in the dark.

Enemy of the People by Maurice Saatchi

Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:03:00 GMT

The full report, already heralded as "THE best indictment of the Labour years" by ConservativeHome, can be downloaded by clicking here.

In this report released today, written in the style of a barrister's brief, Maurice Saatchi charges New Labour on seven Counts.

• Conspiracy to make citizens dependent on the State

• Conspiracy to force citizens to claim benefits to pay higher taxes

• Incitement of poor people to pay more tax than rich people

• Solicitation of multiple tax revenues by stealth

• Attempt to obstruct the right of citizens to independence

• Conspiracy to mesmerize and anaesthetise citizens

• Attempt to conceal their true status as an enemy of the people

On all Counts, the defendants are found: GUILTY

The publication of this new report also marks the first redesign of Centre for Policy Studies publications for many years. The redesign features a new bullesye logo and a colour style reminiscent of the classic Penguin paperbacks. It establishes the Centre for Policy Studies in its proper place – at the centre of policy studies in the UK.

Click here to listen to Maurice Saatchi on the Today Programme

Click here for the Daily Telegraph Article

Click here to see Maurice Saatchi on the Guardian's Comment is Free page

Climate Change Seminar

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:13:00 GMT

Dr S. Fred Singer spoke at a seminar chaired by Lord Lawson and organised by the CPS on climate change on 25 June.

Dr Singer, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Virginia, is one of the authors of ‘Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate’, a report by the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change which disputes the conclusions of the Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change about the causes of global warming.

His recent publication ‘Not So Simple?’ is available to download here and an audio recording of his presentation will be available on the website shortly. The main points of his talk are also available here.

Public Services in the Post Bureaucratic Age – 17 June CPS Seminar with David Cameron and members of the Shadow Cabinet

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:06:00 GMT

The pressing need to tackle the cost of living would require a new approach to reforming public services and reducing the demands on the state, David Cameron argued, at the third of a series of seminars with the Centre for Policy Studies on ‘the post bureaucratic age’. The conference was held in conjunction with the Social Enterprise Coalition on the subject of Public Services in the Post Bureaucratic Age, at the Coin Street Neighbourhood Centre.

Speakers:

David Cameron MP

Michael Gove MP

Nick Herbert MP

Oliver Letwin MP

Theresa May MP

Eric Pickles MP

Grant Shapps MP

David Willetts MP

The seminar provided an opportunity for an exploration of Conservative Party thinking on public service reform, and in particular how best to chart a ‘post-bureaucratic’ course that rejects top down central control and harnesses the potential of voluntary groups, the private sector and social enterprises in service delivery. David Cameron spelt out the ‘big picture’ as being the delivery of ‘progressive goals’ by ‘conservative means’. As a number of speakers remarked, it is the poorest who suffer the most from state failure and the cost to society – both in human and financial terms- is all too-evident from declining social mobility and entrenched dependency.

A number of specific ideas for greater local accountability and diversity of provision were explored. In housing, Grant Shapps highlighted the potential of Community Land Trusts in improving the supply of affordable housing, while Nick Herbert put forward a number of ideas for reforming the criminal justice system – such as providing better information direct to local communities (so-called ‘crime mapping’) and greater accountability for the police and prison services.

In education, Michael Gove put forward the Conservatives’ proposals for supply side reform in schools provision while David Willetts argued that a new approach to vocational education was needed to help unblock Britain’s low social mobility. As Eric Pickles noted, local authorities would play a key part in many of the ‘post bureaucratic’ reforms and he highlighted work already in way, for example in Kent, where service users have benefitted from direct control of care budgets through the ‘Kent Card’.

The conference also heard from a number of social enterprise and voluntary sector leaders who highlighted the services they are already delivering– from education to drug rehabilitation to community leisure facilities. A key theme was how these activities could be developed and replicated and not stifled by bureaucracy and central control.

To listen to David Cameron’s remarks click here

Tories must set parents free to raise children by Jill Kirby

Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:44:00 GMT

Click here to read Jill's latest article in the Telegraph

New CPS Report: 'Inside Out: How to Get Drugs out of Prison'

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:42:00 GMT

In a CPS report out today Huseyin Djemil, the former Drug Strategy Co-ordinator for the seven London Prisons, writes that drugs are widespread in British prisons, undermining any attempt to clean up prisoners from pre-existing addictions, greatly increasing the chances of recidivism and corrupting staff.

Djemil proposes a new pre-emptive intelligence-led approach, one which would start from the premise that all illicit drugs should be eliminated from prisons; establish the ability for prisons to share information on the supply of drugs throughout the system; and enable prisons to work with the rest of the law enforcement community to develop intelligence systems that mirror those of their law enforcement counterparts.

The full report is available here and there is more coverage in the Observer and Channel 4 News

Chris Grayling MP to speak at the CPS later today

Tue, 27 May 2008 11:23:00 GMT

Next Steps in Welfare
Click here to view the full transcript.

Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, Chris Grayling, will today be making a speech to the CPS in which he will be further outlining the Conservative Party’s policy agenda on welfare reform. Please find the extracts below, which focus on benefit claimants aged between 18-21.

Grayling: We will end street-corner benefit culture amongst young people.

"One group in particular will be the focus of our plans – those under the age of 21.

"In Britain today, where jobs a plenty have been created, there is no excuse whatsoever for a young, able-bodied person to be outside the labour force.

"But we all know that on a typical working day, you can see young people hanging around in town centres in almost every part of this country.

"I talked to one such young man in a centre in Manchester a few weeks ago. He had been in trouble as a teenager, but as he approached his twenties, had now decided that he probably wanted a job. But he didn’t know how to get one, wasn’t hyper-motivated to do so, and no one was taking him by the scruff of the neck in steering him in the right direction.

"So he was hanging around on benefits.

"This has to stop.

"So we plan to introduce much tougher rules for young people under the age of twenty-one claiming Job Seekers’ Allowance. For this group, the welfare to work process will start much earlier. There will be employment ‘boot camps’ and community work programmes for those who don’t find a job. Staying at home doing nothing will be a thing of the past.

"Under a Conservative Government, unemployed young people who don’t find a job within three months will be referred automatically to a specialist employment provider, where they will be expected to take part in an intensive programme of work-related activity.

"If they spend twelve months out of work, they will then be moved onto a full-time community work programme lasting a further year.

"This approach is designed to recognise that whilst young people may not always get the job they want immediately, they are better off in a job and looking to move on, than languishing outside the work place.

"If they drop out of work again there will be even tougher limits on the amount of time they can spend at home on benefits. Indeed, many will be referred straight back onto a structured return to work programme or a community work programme. Doing nothing will not be an option.

"So they simply won’t have a chance to become detached from the work place and from preparation for work.

"This approach marks a radical difference from that of the Government. Under their plans, young people will wait a year before they are included in any kind of substantial return to work programme. And then, if they get a job and lose it again, they will wait up to another six months before going back on to the programme.

"Then of course, there are those who play the system and sign off benefits just before the deadline for joining the New Deal – and then move straight back to the start of the process by signing on again for a short time later.

"I want that to stop. Under our proposals, there will be no room for that kind of manoeuvre. In that situation, the clock will simply be frozen. It won’t be reset to zero again.

"With this approach, for those who are struggling, there will be real help. For those who are not, there will be no opt-outs. And we will end the street-corner benefit culture among young people which this Government has left to fester for the past eleven years."

Migrant workers

"London is one of the most vibrant and thriving cities in the world. The last ten years have seen economic growth and prosperity spread through all areas of our capital city. And the regeneration and job creation will continue with the 2012 Olympics in East London. It’s been a decade where there really should have been a job for everyone.

"Yet, in the same ten years there have remained serious pockets of unemployment and welfare dependency in those same areas where there have been thousands of new jobs created. In five London boroughs, one working age person in every five is on benefits. Child poverty remains unchanged in London.

"For the people that have not shared in the growth of the last fifteen years, poverty and deprivation remain endemic. I’ve met some of those people, trapped in a cycle of worklessness. They are often personable and likeable. But they are also a mile away from the job market – lacking experience, self-confidence, the basic know-how about how to get and hold down a job.

"But they have the potential to get there.

"In the past ten years, far too little has been done to help them break out of a cycle of underachievement. It’s not that the work hasn’t been there.

"Thousands of people have moved into all areas of London from overseas to find jobs. That is part of what makes this city so successful.

"But it also demonstrates how badly this government has let down those excluded from the labour market.

"Why on earth are we paying out vast amounts of money to keep people out of work, when jobs are there and being filled by people from overseas?

"Why has the Government stood idly by while such an absurd situation develops?

"I have a straightforward view on this.

"Gordon Brown has used migrant labour as the easy policy option.

"Migrant workers have helped boost economic growth and his reputation as Chancellor at a time when the economic picture would have been somewhat less rosy without the financial impact of people moving into Britain from overseas.

"It’s still happening. The small print in this year’s Budget showed that his Government’s financial projections still depend on an assumption that more people will move into the UK from overseas to work.

"I think Gordon Brown has used the influx of migrant workers as a way of ducking the issue of welfare reform, and as a result, has left millions of people stranded in poverty who could and should have been helped back to work over the last decade.

"After all his rhetoric on poverty, he has failed to deliver the sea change he has promised. And immigration has provided him with a safety net for the economic impact of that failure."

Prisoners and English language

"Our proposals will also target specialised support at those with specific barriers to work in our society.

We will make it mandatory for everyone leaving a custodial or community sentence, who doesn’t have a job to go to, to join a structured return-to-work programme on the day of their release.

Re-offending is one of the big challenges we face in our criminal justice system. Getting offenders back into work quickly is one important part of dealing with the challenge.

We will also target support at those who are struggling in the job market because of a lack of language skills. The contracting structure we establish for the back to work providers will reflect the need for basic language training as an essential part of getting those people into work.

So we expect to see the back to work centres offering English language coaching to particular groups of job seekers either in their own right or in partnership with local colleges.

The Government’s own research has shown that the employment rate for some ethnic minorities is far below the national average, citing language barriers as one of the factors. It’s time serious steps were taken to address that problem."

Foggy Science in London by Fred Singer in the New York Sun

Fri, 23 May 2008 16:10:00 GMT

Tomorrow, May 24, the G-8 environment ministers will be in Japan to commence their annual meeting. Back in London though, the world's oldest science academy, the Royal Society of London, recently has become a vocal advocate of climate alarmism. RS fellows have included Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin.

But, under the previous leadership of Lord Robert May, the Society seems to have taken a wrong turn. They even tried to enlist other science academies into joining them in an alarmist manifesto. However, the U.S. National Academy, though sharing some of these views, decided not to sign up, and the Russian Academy of Sciences has taken an opposing position.

In June 2007, the Royal Society published a pamphlet, titled "Climate Change Controversies: a simple guide," designed to undermine the scientific case of climate skeptics. They presented what they called "misleading arguments" on global warming and then tried to shoot them down.

In countering the RS pamphlet, I have prepared a response that is being published tomorrow by the London-based Centre for Policy Studies under the title "Not so simple? A scientific response to the Royal Society's paper."

Throughout, the Royal Society has relied heavily on the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which used to be regarded as a reliable source of scientific information. The RS thus adopts the IPCC claim that current warming is almost certainly anthropogenic (human-caused) but presents no independent evidence to support such a claim.

In its pamphlet, the Royal Society purports to speak on behalf of a consensus of scientists. But no such consensus exists. Direct polling of climate scientists has shown that about 30% are "skeptical" of anthropogenic global warming. More than 31,000 American scientists recently signed the Oregon Petition, which expresses doubt about the major conclusions of the IPCC, and opposes the drastic mitigation demands of the Kyoto Protocol and the proposed "cap-and-trade" legislation of the U.S. Congress.

My response to the RS is based on the work of some two dozen independent climate scientists from 16 nations who contributed to the report of the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change, or NIPCC, titled "Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate." NIPCC corrects many of the errors and misstatements made in the IPCC report, discusses evidence ignored by the IPCC, and cites evidence available since May 2006, the cut-off date for the latest IPCC Report of May 2007.

The science-based arguments for a more rational approach to global warming and climate change can be summarized as follows:

* The Earth's climate always has changed, with cycles of both warming and cooling, long before humans were a factor. The cycle lengths range from decades, to the 1,500-year cycle discovered in Greenland ice cores, to the 17 ice ages that dominated the past 2 million years.

* The NIPCC report presents solid evidence that any man-made global warming to date has been insignificant in comparison with these natural climate cycles. By contrast, the IPCC has no real evidence to support their claim of anthropogenic global warming.

* While recent man-made increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide may, in principle, make some contribution to temperature rise, the linkages assumed in order to predict significant future global warming are not proven.

* Contrary to the computer simulations of climate models, temperatures have not risen over the last decade — despite a continuing rise in CO2 levels.

* Other factors, such as variable solar activity, solar wind, and cosmic rays, all seem to have a more significant impact on the earth's climate.

* Panicky reactions to exaggerated scenarios of global warming are bound to be costly and do great damage to world economic development.

* Adaptation, not mitigation, is a more appropriate response to climate change — particularly for poorer countries.

Fear of global warming is distorting energy policy. Urgent action is needed to secure future energy supplies: the closure of existing coal-powered stations and old nuclear stations over the next 10 to 20 years risks causing a serious energy shortage until new nuclear power can be brought on stream. Yet resistance by anti-fossil fuel protesters already is retarding the development of much needed conventional generating capacity.

The choices that are being made now about the use of resources and the costs imposed on global development will have a huge impact on both current and future prosperity. It is imperative, for the sake of rational policy development worldwide, that the debate on the true nature of global warming and its causes move from being a matter of assertion and exaggerated scaremongering to a more reasoned debate based on the scientific facts.

It is a pity that the Royal Society, rather than facilitate debate, has tried to misrepresent the honest views of those who are skeptical of what has become climate change orthodoxy.

Mr. Singer, a professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia, is the former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service. As a reviewer of IPCC reports, he shares the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore. His most recent book is "Unstoppable Global Warming — Every 1500 Years."

Click here to view the full report.

Girls now carry knives... and will use them

Wed, 14 May 2008 11:28:00 GMT

Iyabo Oba will soon publish a pamphlet with the CPS on the increasing trend for crimes to be committed by young women.

For the past year Iyabo has been studying the behaviour of young women from ethinic backgrounds in London. The results of this research have been alarming, noticing a distinct rise in girls forming their own gangs and participating in increasingly violent behaviour.

Click here to read Iyabo's article in the Telegraph published today. A full report of her research will be published by the CPS in June.

To keep up to date with our publiscations please subscribe to the RSS Feed on this blog.

Jill Kirby on the Westminster Hour

Mon, 12 May 2008 12:37:00 GMT

Jill Kirby was interviewed by the BBC Westminster Hour on Sunday. The discussion centred on the next steps for David Cameron and how the Conservatives can maintain momentum up to the next election.

Click here to listen to Jill Kirby, Director of the CPS on the BBC's Westminster Hour

The Unfinished Business of Devolution

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:58:00 GMT

Sir Malcolm Rifkind addressed the CPS last night on the West Lothian Question and his proposal for answering it. His idea is for a Grand Committee of English MPs to decide on all purely English legislation, with a convention that the House of Commons as a whole should not overturn the Committee's decisions. He argued that this would address the unfairness caused by devolution without resorting to the 'over-reaction' of an English Parliament.

Tim Montgomerie has provided a very helpful summary of Sir Malcolm's speech on ConservativeHome and you can listen to the whole speech here.

Big, Not Better?

Mon, 07 Apr 2008 11:22:00 GMT

Does cutting taxes mean cutting public services? Do countries with 'slim' governments preside over significantly more unequal societies than 'big government' countries? Our new report out today by economist Keith Marsden provides some striking answers to these questions amongst others. Using data from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund 'Big, Not Better?' shows that over the last decade, countries which have ‘slim’ (ie low tax) governments:

have been able to increase funding for public services more generously;
have enjoyed higher growth and lower debt; and,
have spent more on law and order, and defence,

…than their ‘bigger’ (higher taxed) government counterparts. And the report shows that this has not come at the expense of income distribution, which is broadly similar to the level in 'big government' countries.

Read CPS Director Jill Kirby's response here and the Telegraph's Janet Daley here. The report has been covered by BBC News Online and the Daily Telegraph's business section

Politics, Policy and the Internet

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:52:00 GMT

The Centre for Policy Studies hosted a discussion seminar with the Daily Telegraph in Westminster yesterday on the the impact of the Internet on politics and the policy-making process. We heard from CPS author Robert Colvile, the Shadow Chancellor George Osborne, the founder of mySociety Tom Steinberg and Telegraph journalist Iain Martin.

You can listen to a recording of the speeches in the 'What's New' section and there is more coverage of the event from CPS Director Jill Kirby and also on the Daily Telegraph's blog here and here

FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY IN THE POST-BUREAUCRATIC AGE

Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:30:00 GMT

In the second of a series of conferences on the role of the state in the ‘post-bureaucratic age’ the Centre for Policy Studies hosted a half-day seminar on 27 March with the Conservative Party on the subject of ‘Fairness and Equality in the Post-Bureaucratic Age’.

Speakers at the event:

David Cameron MP

Michael Gove MP

David Willetts MP

Oliver Letwin MP

Greg Clark MP

Eric Pickles MP

Sayeeda Warsi

Caroline Spelman MP

Jeremy Hunt MP

Grant Shapps MP

Some of the issues addressed during the conference included the persistence of underlying poverty, the flaws in the Government’s tax credit system, widening educational inequality and declining social mobility. The speakers argued that Labour’s ‘bureaucratic’ approach had failed to deliver either fairness or equality of opportunity and policy proposals in the areas of school reform, housing, and welfare were outlined. David Cameron concluded the conference with a speech giving more detail of the Party’s ‘post-bureacratic’ approach.

CPS's New site

Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:31:00 GMT

The Centre for Policy Studies is delighted to introduce to you our new interactive website - a new breakthrough in UK political interactivity.

We have designed this new site to allow our members and the public to openly discuss the issues raised in our publications and lectures. We have also provided you with a Revolutionary 'Easy blogging' function, which allows all our members to start their own blog - and join the Internet revolution in one easy click! Do join this site, it only takes a minute to create a set of Login details.

This is the first webjam political site to be launched in the UK and we would greatly welcome both your comments on how it all works; and any comments you might like to post on the actual site.

The site is very much in the "trial and development" stage and is not being formally launched until later this month - so feel free to comment. If you have an RSS reader please subscribe to this blog - if you dont know what RSS is, look at this handy help: http://www.whatisrss.com/

Thank you