MPs join in attack on £11bn smart meter plan

A MASSIVE scheme costing billions to fit smart meters into small business premises and homes came under fire last night as MPs accused the Government of failing to justify the cost.

Energy firms have been told to install up to 53million smart meters in more than 30million premises, with consumers paying for the cost through their bills.

But a new report by the Science and Technology Select Committee said there was a ‘lack of clarity’ about the move and called the Government’s justification for the plan ‘weak’.

The meters measure gas and electricity use and automatically send readings to suppliers. Consumers are supposed to be able to cut energy use because they can see what activities cost the most.

The report said the plan risked becoming ‘an inefficient way of helping consumers to make small savings on their energy bills’. It estimated savings at as little as 2 per cent.

The criticism came a day after similar complaints by The Institute of Directors (IoD), which told The Mail on Sunday last night that the project’s cost had been underestimated by almost half.

It estimated the switch will cost £11billion, or £400 for each premise.

Dan Lewis, policy adviser at the IoD, said: ‘The report is right to highlight transparency concerns and it is deeply worrying that they, like us, have struggled to obtain updated evidence from Government on costs and benefits.

‘Oil and gas prices have halved in the last two years and cheaper smart grid technologies are now available without smart meters – but the programme plods on with delays and incompatible meter deployment.’

Meanwhile, a company that tried to sue British Gas over its installation programme has had a £30million claim thrown out after a judge dismissed a patent filed in 2000. The action would have affected two million smart meters that have already been installed.

A judge told the firm, Metertech, that British Gas would have been guilty of infringement, but in a twist then revoked the original patent because it was not original enough to be regarded as valid.