The Daily Telegraph

A ban on conservato­ries is exactly the sort of idiocy that could finish off Boris and ‘net zero’

Instead of kowtowing to eco extremists, the Tories should be taking practical steps to reduce energy costs

-

The clue’s in the name: the Conservati­ve Party. How can the Conservati­ve Party even think of banning conservato­ries? Did they miss the memo? How could they be unaware that an attack on conservato­ry-dwellers is an attack on everything it means to be a Conservati­ve: aspiration­al, homeowning, family-oriented – and rather proud of the garden? The proposed restrictio­ns on conservato­ry building in the name of “net zero” are a red rag to the already enraged core of Britain’s Tory voters.

Such obvious facts are no longer visible from the inner ring of the death spiral that Boris Johnson’s premiershi­p appears to have entered. Instead of throwing things desperatel­y out of the tornado, in the hope that they will catch onto something – Boats! Sonic blasts! Ghana! The BBC! – No 10 ought to reflect upon why the Boris operation is so damnably short of grappling hooks.

Here and there it drifts, sustained only by the occasional outburst of brilliant oratory, like air blasted into a hot-air balloon. The only thing needed to burst the bubble was the pinprick of a scandal like Partygate and hey ho, down it goes.

Soon, however, if Mr Johnson can last that long, the party rage will be spent and he will have an opportunit­y to do something other than flounder. Here is something he could actually do that would genuinely improve people’s lives: he could start to solve the critical situation in our energy supply.

This situation, unlike supply chain congestion, is entirely a mess of our own making. Rising household bills are now one of the main contributo­rs to inflation, which is outstrippi­ng wage growth. Later this year, in spite of the price cap, costs are expected to smash all records set over the last decade, taking us from an average annual bill of around £1,200 to one potentiall­y over £1,500.

At present, the debate on what to do about this centres on fiddling about with VAT, which accounts for 5 per cent of your bill, or company profits, which account for 1-2 per cent. Thanks for nothing, Westminste­r.

Politician­s could move the dial a bit by suspending various green levies and boiler schemes. But the “social” costs loaded onto consumers are in fact mostly made up of redistribu­tive policies like giving discounts to poor households. That is not something it would be wise to suspend during a price spike.

By far the biggest share of our bills is made up of the simple cost of energy on the open market. If the Government is not prepared to pull any levers that increase our energy supply, then there is little it can do to bring down costs.

In fact, for 20 years, government­s have been doing the opposite: shutting down coal generation and only partially replacing it with renewable generation, which depends on the weather. They claimed they were “diversifyi­ng” supply by building up our ability to import gas. But guess what: it turns out that when gas is choked off at one end of the European continent by pernicious Russian policy, it affects us at the other end, no matter how many pipelines and terminals we have built.

Fortunatel­y for Boris, there is something he could do about this relatively quickly. He could put together a package of incentives to ramp up exploratio­n and production of gas in the North Sea.

Gas producers wouldn’t be able to fill demand in time to affect prices this year, but they could almost certainly raise production enough in the next few years to take the pressure off households and stabilise energy costs for the next decade, giving us valuable time to build a large-scale nuclear energy programme to replace all those coal plants that were hastily shut down.

After all, Norway, whose gas explorers operate just the other side of the North Sea, has managed to keep its reserves steady over the past 30 years, while Britain’s gas industry, treated recklessly as a cash cow by successive government­s, has gone into sharp decline.

Nor would this approach mean junking the Government’s net zero aspiration­s. At present, we import more than a fifth of our gas in liquid form on tankers, one of the most energy-inefficien­t and expensive ways to use the fuel. Domestic production would simply displace a large slice of that consumptio­n and see us through to the low-carbon era.

In the long run, a far more ambitious nuclear programme, improvemen­ts in energy storage and a carbon tariff to prevent emissions being moved offshore would enable the UK to deliver lower emissions without becoming the poster-child for how to impoverish yourself through reckless green policies.

There is only one reason why a Conservati­ve Government would shy away from this policy: it’s afraid of the environmen­talist movement.

Green protesters are peculiarly parochial in their view of carbon emissions. They think that if the UK produces more of its own gas, it mechanical­ly increases the amount of gas the world uses, ignoring the fact that markets are dynamic. There is no point trying to convince the most zealous of these believers. There will always be another bevy of them waiting to throw themselves onto motorways or block bridges. And if the Government gets serious about reviving domestic energy markets, you can bet the Extinction crew will stop at nothing to sabotage the plan.

Rather than cowering before their roadblocks, Boris should go into battle. It is unacceptab­le that a tiny minority should determine policy for the rest of the country when households are struggling to manage an extraordin­ary hit to living standards.

Voters want to see a Prime Minister willing to stand up for their interests with policies that will deliver a noticeable improvemen­t to their lives. They would warm to someone who is tough enough to take a battering dished out by the green establishm­ent. They are tired of instead listening to a dithering man without a plan promising he will “unleash Britain’s potential” by banning conservato­ries and kiboshing our gas hobs.

I’m among those who believe that a shift to “net zero” energy production is necessary and that Britain can benefit from being at the forefront of it. But there is no future for this agenda if it simply becomes a proxy for a sustained assault on our quality of life, first through our gas bills and then via our home improvemen­ts. And there is no future for a prime minister who follows up outrage and scandal with platitudes and joyless, environmen­talist finger-wagging.

It’s time to stop telling us what we can’t do and start telling us what we can and will do to improve our lot. Otherwise, Boris might as well just give up now.

 ?? ?? Zealots: An Extinction Rebellion protester blocks the road in central London
Zealots: An Extinction Rebellion protester blocks the road in central London
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom