THE energy tax is almost here. From April, British businesses will be liable for the Climate Change Levy (CCL), a tax that adds about 15 per cent to typical energy bills. However, many heavy energy users are eligible to join a discount scheme. Under these agreements, businesses that accept and meet targets to reduce their energy use will receive an 80 per cent discount on their CCL until 2013.
According to the Westminster grapevine, some ministers are thinking of changing the provisions of the CCL. They believe it is illogical to bracket output from carbon-free nuclear power and output from fossil-fuel generators in this way. But other ministers continue to be concerned about the 鈥済reen vote鈥� and the antinuclear lobby.
As often happens in politics, one argument leads to another. And on this occasion, the debate is whether energy policy should stay with the Department of Trade and Industry or be transferred to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Quite what energy policy has to do with food and agriculture beats me.
Advertisement
IT鈥橲 amazing how often MPs take up, or are given, responsibilities befitting their name. Now we can add Bob Blizzard to the list. He represents the beautiful, yet windy, Suffolk constituency of Waveney. He asked energy minister Brian Wilson recently about the government鈥檚 timescale for its programme to develop offshore wind energy.
Wilson said that this form of renewable energy was expected to contribute significantly to Britain鈥檚 energy needs by 2010. Furthermore, earlier this year the Crown Estate gave permission for 18 offshore wind-farm projects to be set up on the seabed around Britain. The first of these projects would start construction in 2003.
Blizzard then suggested that the programme gave British companies a great opportunity to get ahead of their German and Dutch competitors in developing, building and installing wind turbines.
Wilson said that a problem with promoting wind power on home ground is that 20 years ago Denmark snatched a worldwide manufacturing lead worth 拢4 billion a year, while Britain chose not to support this renewable energy source. Clearly, Wilson added, it鈥檚 imperative that this doesn鈥檛 happen with wave, biomass and other technologies where Britain still has a worldwide lead.
PETER AINSWORTH, the opposition spokesman on agriculture, was right to ask Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she had looked at a problem affecting farmers raising brassica crops such as Brussels sprouts and cabbages. In a nutshell, they can no longer use two powerful organophosphate pesticides, carbofuran and chlorfenvinphos, because of their potential toxicity. As from 1 January the government has revoked licences to use these chemicals as insecticides. Beckett was asked how much this development was costing farmers.
She was somewhat dismissive of any economic impact, as it wasn鈥檛 part of the assessment. The overriding priority was to protect people who grow and process brassicas and the consumers who eat them.
Elliot Morley, the junior minister with responsibilities for schemes involving both agriculture and the environment, said that the problem was that the manufacturers of these pesticides did not submit supporting safety data for their products, as required by Britain鈥檚 review regulations.
The growers are angry, but I believe the government is right鈥攁t least until the suppliers can come up with evidence that the pesticides meet modern safety standards.