I'm with Co-operative Power, they have one tarrif.



There, thats easy isn't it.



Being a members co-operative with no shareholders to satisfy they simply promise that you will always have the cheapest rate for gas or electricity that they can offer, everyone will have that same price, and the more members they have the cheaper the price will become due to their purchasing power.



They don't promise to be the cheapest, but then nor do any of the other energy providers, they promise to be as competitive as they can be and to pass that back to their members.



And you get a divvy too.

What, Cameron pops round too?

I hadn't realised it was that crazy.



But spot on about why – and why people don't make change very often.



It's another of those things where we're all supposed to spend huge chunks of our lives spent researching this stuff, instead of actually having someone or some company actually behaving in a trustworthy manner and with consideration for the customer and an ethos of service.

The average energy bill works out to be about £3.50 per day. Which in reality isn't an awful lot to heat a property, cook, and power all the entertainment that the average house needs.



The people who are supposedly in "fuel poverty" are probably the ones who spend significantly more than that per day on cigarettes, or booze, or gambling without thinking twice about it.

As I said, the price comparison websites make it an absolute cinch to compare, the reason is not the complication, because the donkey work is all done for you. The reason is that very many customers, for example no doubt a huge slice of the elderly, are scared of the very idea od swithcing, or don't need the hassle, or don't have the internet access or confidence required.



I'm thinking that ATEOTD the power companies know very accurately what percentage are likely to change and what percentage are likely to resist change and stay long term despite the fact they could get better deals with other suppliers, and they are content to make money by relying on that resistance to change.





Personally I don't think tariff simplification would do very much at all, if people are fearful or change resistant then that won't alter. Only Cameron's nutty plan, to force companies to put everyone on the lowest tariff, would work but that would sadly not have the effect of saving them any money overall, as the power companies will want to get £X per annum from power sales and they are not too bothered how they do it. How Dave assumes that that "lowest tariff" would be less than people presently pay, overall, is the mystery.



I would definitely be much worse off, as I'm always on the cheapest tariff available, so I suppose I'd end up subsidising those who are unable or unwilling to shop around.

Sounds great doesn't it? £24.50 per week. may sounds a tad different – particularly when you consider all the people who can only get part-time jobs, many of them on minimum wage.







This, I'm afraid, unless you can provide evidence, is just tabloidesque guesswork.

So by your reckoning on the average required to heat & power a home, the average income should be £245 pw.



There is a clear definition of fuel poverty: If a household spends more than 10% of its net income on fuel, they are fuel-poor

how do you work that out? if you enter an agreement to pay so much for so long, that's the contract. of you agree to something that's not the 'cheapest' then that's your problem.

Yes, we know that.



What a great shame that idiot Prime Minister wasn't aware of the fact before he spilled his guts in panic at PMQs

Yes, we know.



Thats not what Camerons new law will state though, to take his word as law (which it clearly won't be as it totally ridiculous) it will be illegal for energy providers to hold or offer contracts which are not the cheapest that they can offer, whether you're at the start or middle of the contract - he said that they will be compelled to offer all of their customers the cheapest available tariff.



Of course we all know thats not what he meant, but he said it, in parliament, in a debate, and the proof that it was purely invented on the hoof is that his own department bumbled an immediate response to say that there were no details yet, and the energy companies had never heard of the suggestion let alone been consulted on it.



Policies invented on the spur of the moment without consultation to give the gullible something to feel good about - thats not what we need from a prime minister.

so, the only words he missed were '...when any fixed term deal ends' or something similar. and if he'd have said that you'd have been in total agreement with him? not really spilling his guts in panic though, was it.

aaah, so you knew what he meant, so you're just having a little hissy fit because he's a tory?



why should the energy companies be consulted on it? in fact, if he had consulted with them you'd probably whine and bleat that they were appeasing the energy companies and it'd be a stitch up anyway!



policies on the spur of the moment to make people feel good? sounds like a bloody good plan for political parties to me. well, unless you do something really stupid, like remove the 10p tax band and hail it as a wonderful step, until someone does a bit of investigation which shows that millions of the poorest in society get screwed, i'd avoid doing something like that. still, people still voted for 'em, in fact i bet there's some who are whining about what the tories are meant to be doing to the poor now who voted for the party that did that.