Why local councils should become energy suppliers

Freeing local authorities to compete in the energy market would reduce prices, attract green industry and create jobs.

Since Ed Milliband unveiled his plan at the Labour Party conference to freeze energy bills until 2017, the price of energy has rarely been out of the news. The problem with the narrow debate around the size of household bills is that it fails to address the issue of diversifying energy generation. The key to lower prices is, ultimately, a more competitive market. Local government has its roots in energy generation – modern Birmingham was built on the revenue from the local gasworks. It’s time we got councils back into the energy game.

The benefits of a new generation of local authority energy provision will not just be felt in terms of greater competition and lower bills. Councils can sell energy to raise money to pay for public services and, if this is positioned smartly, spur green economic development, creating a new generation of good jobs in the sustainability sector. The low carbon economy already accounts for 8% of GDP. With support from councils, it could grow significantly.

Some councils are already using green energy capture to cut their own fuel bills locally. Birmingham, Islington and Woking are all experimenting with energy generation and redistribution. Islington’s Bunhill Energy Centre, for instance, captures wasted heat to provide cheaper energy to estates in the local area – but these initiative tend to be on the periphery of activity. Scaling this up, generating energy on a much larger scale and linking it to local economic growth strategies could completely transform how we control and use energy at a very local level.

Local authorities have a huge role in economic development. If councils were freed up to compete in the energy market on a local basis, to generate and provide energy, this could attract green industry, create jobs and, crucially, underpin communities with green infrastructure. Local authorities are best placed to shape local markets and skills to align to the green energy agenda.

Generating and recycling energy at a local level would also have a huge benefit to local people in a way that the Big Six just can’t achieve. Local authorities would be able to provide cheaper energy directly to their residents, which should take advantage of local resources in the process. Communities would also become much more directly involved in the energy market by working with local authorities through energy co-operatives for instance, to capture and recycle energy to use themselves and sell back to councils for cheaper redistribution locally. Giving this power directly to communities would both incentivise behaviour change locally whilst helping to reduce the cost of living.

Some will question why councils should return to energy. Why not instead partner with energy suppliers and set up joint ventures to distribute cheaper energy? The problem is that attracting this sort of investment is a real challenge. Local authorities have the financial muscle to invest in this sort of infrastructure development that could accelerate projects quickly, whilst linking it to economic growth strategies.

But the real answer to this question lies with community ownership of resources, which would transform how councils and residents interact with the energy market. Given the current direction of energy bills and how powerless people feel to control it, recycling and generating energy using local resources will become more, not less important, in addressing this problem. Behavioural change will only come alongside ownership of these resources and local authorities, as guardians of localities, are ideally placed to lead this.

Laura Wilkes is Head of Policy and Research at the New Local Government Network

A photo illustration of the filament inside a lightbulb on October 17, 2013 in London. Photograph: Getty Images.

Laura Wilkes is Head of Policy and Research at the New Local Government Network

Getty
Show Hide image

Theresa May’s stage-managed election campaign keeps the public at bay

Jeremy Corbyn’s approach may be chaotic, but at least it’s more authentic.

The worst part about running an election campaign for a politician? Having to meet the general public. Those ordinary folk can be a tricky lot, with their lack of regard for being on-message, and their pesky real-life concerns.

But it looks like Theresa May has decided to avoid this inconvenience altogether during this snap general election campaign, as it turns out her visit to Leeds last night was so stage-managed that she barely had to face the public.

Accusations have been whizzing around online that at a campaign event at the Shine building in Leeds, the Prime Minister spoke to a room full of guests invited by the party, rather than local people or people who work in the building’s office space.

The Telegraph’s Chris Hope tweeted a picture of the room in which May was addressing her audience yesterday evening a little before 7pm. He pointed out that, being in Leeds, she was in “Labour territory”:

But a few locals who spied this picture online claimed that the audience did not look like who you’d expect to see congregated at Shine – a grade II-listed Victorian school that has been renovated into a community project housing office space and meeting rooms.

“Ask why she didn’t meet any of the people at the business who work in that beautiful building. Everyone there was an invite-only Tory,” tweeted Rik Kendell, a Leeds-based developer and designer who says he works in the Shine building. “She didn’t arrive until we’d all left for the day. Everyone in the building past 6pm was invite-only . . . They seemed to seek out the most clinical corner for their PR photos. Such a beautiful building to work in.”

Other tweeters also found the snapshot jarring:

Shine’s founders have pointed out that they didn’t host or invite Theresa May – rather the party hired out the space for a private event: “All visitors pay for meeting space in Shine and we do not seek out, bid for, or otherwise host any political parties,” wrote managing director Dawn O'Keefe. The guestlist was not down to Shine, but to the Tory party.

The audience consisted of journalists and around 150 Tory activists, according to the Guardian. This was instead of employees from the 16 offices housed in the building. I have asked the Conservative Party for clarification of who was in the audience and whether it was invite-only and am awaiting its response.

Jeremy Corbyn accused May of “hiding from the public”, and local Labour MP Richard Burgon commented that, “like a medieval monarch, she simply briefly relocated her travelling court of admirers to town and then moved on without so much as a nod to the people she considers to be her lowly subjects”.

But it doesn’t look like the Tories’ painstaking stage-management is a fool-proof plan. Having uniform audiences of the party faithful on the campaign trail seems to be confusing the Prime Minister somewhat. During a visit to a (rather sparsely populated) factory in Clay Cross, Derbyshire, yesterday, she appeared to forget where exactly on the campaign trail she was:

The management of Corbyn’s campaign has also resulted in gaffes – but for opposite reasons. A slightly more chaotic approach has led to him facing the wrong way, with his back to the cameras.

Corbyn’s blunder is born out of his instinct to address the crowd rather than the cameras – May’s problem is the other way round. Both, however, seem far more comfortable talking to the party faithful, even if they are venturing out of safe seat territory.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

0800 7318496