Here are some of the false claims SSE made to customers

Fined a record £10.5m.

According to Ofgem, here are some of the misleading statements made by SSE, which was today fined a record £10.5m for "numerous breaches of its obligations relating to telephone, in-store and doorstep sales activities":

- Getting customers to switch to a more expensive contract, whilst telling them they were moving to a cheaper one. From Ofgen via the Telegraph:

Mrs X had her energy supplied by one of SSE’s competitors. She was paying an annual bill of £1,600 for electricity and gas. In April 2010 she was visited by an SSE sales agent. The sales agent said Mrs X would only pay £1,423 with SSE. That was not true. In fact she was going to pay £1,734 per annum. As a result Mrs.X thought that she was going to save £177 but in fact she was put on a tariff that was £134 more expensive than her previous deal.

- Saying that other suppliers were making "false promises".

- Saying that other suppliers were putting their prices up.

- Offering to put customers of a "preferred customer tariff" but then charging them more for doing so.

- Suggesting SSE was following government guidelines which would make energy prices cheaper. Here's an extract from an SSE script:

What I’m here to do today is show you a government thing called deregulation which results in your energy prices being lowered by doing nothing at all.

But according to Ofgem:

This is inaccurate and misleading as there is no automatic reduction in energy prices owing to “a government thing called deregulation” or by the customer “doing nothing at all”.

“The level of fine reflects the seriousness and duration of breaches, the likely substantial harm that they have caused and the likely gain to SSE,” Ofgem said in a statement.

 
Photograph: Getty Images
Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Here's something the political class has completely missed about Brexit

As Hillary Clinton could tell them, arguments about trade have a long, long afterlife. 

I frequently hear the same thing at Westminster, regardless of whether or not the person in question voted to leave the European Union or not: that, after March 2019, Brexit will be “over”.

It’s true that on 30 March 2019, the United Kingdom will leave the EU whether the government has reached a deal with the EU27 on its future relationship or not. But as a political issue, Brexit will never be over, regardless of whether it is seen as a success or a failure.

You don’t need to have a crystal ball to know this, you just need to have read a history book, or, failing that, paid any attention to current affairs. The Democratic primaries and presidential election of 2016 hinged, at least in part, on the consequences of the North American Free Trade Association (Nafta). Hillary Clinton defeated a primary opponent, Bernie Sanders, who opposed the deal, and lost to Donald Trump, who also opposed the measure.

Negotiations on Nafta began in 1990 and the agreement was fully ratified by 1993. Economists generally agree that it has, overall, benefited the nations that participate in it. Yet it was still contentious enough to move at least some votes in a presidential election 26 years later.

Even if Brexit turns out to be a tremendous success, which feels like a bold call at this point, not everyone will experience it as one. (A good example of this is the collapse in the value of the pound after Britain’s Leave vote. It has been great news for manufacturers, domestic tourist destinations and businesses who sell to the European Union. It has been bad news for domestic households and businesses who buy from the European Union.)

Bluntly, even a successful Brexit is going to create some losers and an unsuccessful one will create many more. The arguments over it, and the political fissure it creates, will not end on 30 March 2019 or anything like it. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.