AS we approach winter, not that we have really had any summer to speak of in Scotland this year, the Ofgem cap on energy bills is set to rise by 10%, a step which Ofgem boss Jonathan Brearley told the BBC was taken in order to allow the energy companies to make a "small profit".
Last year British Gas made a profit of £750 million, a massive ten-fold increase. The only conclusion we can draw from this is that Ofgem sees its main role as being to protect the interests of the energy companies and not the interests of the consumer.
This shows why we desperately need a real publicly owned energy company, not Keir Starmer's fake GB Energy, which is an investment vehicle for channelling public money to the private sector, not an energy company in any meaningful sense of the word.
The rise in the cap on energy bills in order to protect the profits of the energy companies is all the more galling as it comes shortly after a Labour government which had promised lower energy bills during the recent general election campaign abolished the universal entitlement to the winter fuel allowance for pensioners in England and Wales.
READ MORE: Labour Party accused of 'betrayal' as energy prices set to soar
At a stroke this cost the Scottish Government £160 million in Barnett consequentials, forcing the Scottish Government to copy the move in Scotland, where energy bills are typically higher. Anas Read My Lips No Austerity Sarwar naturally refused to apologise or even take responsibility for the decision of his party to axe the universal benefit for pensioners.
This is despite the fact that his deputy Jackie Baillie had previously said she would "always fight" to keep the payments in place and not means-tested. There wasn't much in the way of fighting from the usually combative Baillie when Rachel Reeves axed the payments.
Instead of Sarwar standing up for the interests of Scottish pensioners he has tried to shift the blame for his own party's choice to protect the wealthy by not raising taxes onto the Scottish Government, calling it an "opportunity" for the Scottish Government. Sure thing, Sarwar, it's an opportunity to let pensioners freeze in the dark.
Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie said: “Labour spent the election campaign telling us that they would lower bills, but in their first few weeks in office we have seen price hikes and huge cuts to the winter fuel allowance.It is a betrayal of the many people who voted for them in good faith."
Even a Labour government minister in Wales has criticised the Westminster Labour decision. On Wednesday, in response to a question from Welsh Tory leader Andrew RT Davies, Wales’s Culture Secretary Jane Hutt said that the decision to make the benefit means-tested "risks pushing some pensioners into fuel poverty".
His comments were echoed by charities concerned with the welfare of the elderly, in a statement Age UK called the decision "wrong" and said: "as many as two million pensioners who badly need the money to stay warm this winter will not receive it and will be in serious trouble as a result."
A large number of pensioners who are entitled to means tested benefits do not claim them, put off by the stigma and distress of negotiating the UK's punitive and cruel benefits system.
The Labour Party in Scotland, where the problems of high winter fuel bills are most acute, is shamefully silent, just as it was shamefully silent about the decision of their Westminster bosses to keep the two child cap on benefits.
SNP MSP Jackie Dunbar said: “At least someone in the Labour Party still has the backbone to speak out against the cuts-agenda being driven by Keir Starmer’s government. Meanwhile in Scotland, Anas Sarwar’s silence has been deafening.
"Labour has made the political choice to continue with a Tory-austerity cuts agenda – hitting the most vulnerable in our society by scrapping the universal Winter Fuel Payment and refusing to get rid of the cruel two-child benefit cap.
"Sarwar's deputy Jackie Baillie who previously said she would fight to protect the universal payment has also been silent. It is clear that Labour in Scotland are willing to rollover and go along with whatever their London bosses tell them.
"It should not be the case that pensioners in a country as energy-rich as Scotland are forced to bear the brunt of spending decisions taken at Westminster."
The bad-tempered chaotic farce that the Scottish Conservatives are pleased to call a leadership contest continues to rumble on, falling even more apart with every passing day.
The party hierarchy has ignored a joint letter signed by four of the then candidates calling for the contest to be paused while an investigation is carried out into the behaviour of outgoing leader Douglas Ross, who is apparently extremely nasty even by the standards of the nasty party. MSPs Murdo Fraser, Liam Kerr, Jamie Greene, and Brian Whittle – of whom only Fraser remains in the race – wrote to the party demanding answers.
However, there has been no response to their letter from the Scottish Tory Party management board, which many in the party believe is attempting to stitch up the election in favour of Ross's crony Findlay, who was accused by other candidates of briefing negative stories to the press about his competitors. Nasty party, nasty people.
READ MORE: Martin Lewis in warning to Labour amid energy price increase
Fraser, one of the three remaining candidates has said that he voted against gay marriage when it came up for a vote in Holyrood in 2014 and is still opposed to it.
This is despite a promise to 'unite' the Scottish Tories and the fact that Greene, who is openly gay and is co-convenor of the Scottish Parliament's cross-party LGBT group, ditched his own leadership bid to throw his weight behind him.
This piece is an extract from today’s REAL Scottish Politics newsletter, which is emailed out at 7pm every weekday with a round-up of the day's top stories and exclusive analysis from the Wee Ginger Dug.
To receive our full newsletter including this analysis straight to your email inbox, click HERE and click the "+" sign-up symbol for the REAL Scottish Politics.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel