Number of PV systems installed

[TedM]

The Feed-in Tariff payments are notionally government spending as the rates are controlled by DECC and OFGEM administer the scheme. But who makes up these rules? Well, in this case it is down to the EU. Nuff said.

But prior to the coalition government's Comprehensive Spending Review of October 2010 there was no such thing as a FiTs Budget. It was dreamed up out of thin air in order to allow DECC to claim that they were going to save £40million, as their contribution towards the coalition's need to reduce 'spending' as part of the austerity plans.

 

[The Solar King]

May I add a bit of clarification. It is not the EU but the Treasury. They have decided that FITs are taxation. This is perverse as they are funded by a levy on energy bills.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]It is unclear if the Feed In Tariffs should even be under the control of the Treasury at all. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The European Court recently decreed money raised for the German Feed-in Tariff to be outside of Government public spending. It should also be noted that members of the Office for National Statistics (ONS) is yet to give a ruling on whether money raised for the feed-in tariff is included in public spending. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Although the Treasury has not received a ruling from the ONS, it regards the FiT scheme as public spending, is taking the money raised by the levy, and then capping its use.

Don't expect a ruling from the ONS any time soon. If they do, and they decide in the Treasury's favour, this could then be open to legal challenge because of the European Court ruling.
[/FONT]

 

[Somecamel]

May I add a bit of clarification. It is not the EU but the Treasury. They have decided that FITs are taxation. This is perverse as they are funded by a levy on energy bills.

It is unclear if the Feed In Tariffs should even be under the control of the Treasury at all. The European Court recently decreed money raised for the German Feed-in Tariff to be outside of Government public spending. It should also be noted that members of the Office for National Statistics (ONS) is yet to give a ruling on whether money raised for the feed-in tariff is included in public spending. Although the Treasury has not received a ruling from the ONS, it regards the FiT scheme as public spending, is taking the money raised by the levy, and then capping its use.

Don't expect a ruling from the ONS any time soon. If they do, and they decide in the Treasury's favour, this could then be open to legal challenge because of the European Court ruling.

I had a meeting with Greg Barker and brought up this exact point- He quite clearly stated that the Government had done this not the EU.

Go Figure?

 

[Aquinas_Quark]

Well that answers my question - NOT! Another government regulation as clear as mud?
"...Regards the FIT scheme as public spending, is taking the money and capping it..."
I still undertand that the energy companies pay FITs - What is happening here?

 

[The Solar King]

Let me give you a little more information from a commentary I am circulating to all MSPs with results of a survey on the impact of the changes to FIts on involved Scottish Businesses:

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]"The assertion by Chris Huhne that the PV sector will "do little to tackle climate change" is both shocking and downright wrong. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Huhne is unconvinced of the case for support of Solar. There is evidence for this in his admission to a parliamentary committee that he did not bother to contact the Treasury to ask if extra money could be found to lift the feed-in tariff spending cap, despite the huge impact on jobs and investment the proposed cuts are already having.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The Current budget cap was created by Messrs Barker and Huhne. They and their officials submitted a set of figures to the Treasury for the budget process that were not seen by anyone outside their department, and now this has become the cap.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The scale of the cuts, and the pace at which they are being imposed, can only be explained if seen in the context of the Westminster government's growing support for the Big Six energy Company-endorsed plan for a low carbon energy mix that is primarily reliant on large scale centralised energy projects, despite the fact the government claims to be in favour of a balanced mix of centralised and decentralised energy generation and statements to this effect are in the Coalition Pact."

You will understand that if you could turn my anger into energy I could power Scotland for six Months.

[/FONT]

 

[TedM]

The reason I said it was down to the EU was this document from 14th April 2010 - http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/state_aids/comp-2010/n094-10.pdf

If you read section 3 (from para 63) you will see how the EU decided on the status for UK FiTs. And their summary decision is at :

"69. The Commission concludes therefore that the notified scheme involves a transfer of State resources."

I'd be very interested if you have any documentation that shows HM Treasury had come to any similar decision that predates this.

 

[TedM]

I had a meeting with Greg Barker and brought up this exact point- He quite clearly stated that the Government had done this not the EU.

Go Figure?

I would guess that Barker was referring to the concoction of a 'budget' as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review.

 

[The Solar King]

Some of my comments refer to what was said in the Select Committee last week.