PracticePeople In PracticeUtilities Bill is over-interventionist

Utilities Bill is over-interventionist

Although the government?s intentions are well motivated the outcome of the new Utilities Bill will ultimately be harmful to the consumer.

The committee stage of the government?s Utilities Bill is now well underway. The Bill is designed to update utilities regulation and ? to the extent it does this ? it is receiving full support from the opposition. We agree with the need to reform the electricity pool, to merge the regulation of gas and electricity, and we support the separation of licensing for distribution and supply.

But we have difficulties with the Bill?s adoption of a new over-interventionist approach. When utilities were privatised they retained much of their monopoly status, so the regulator was introduced to prevent the consumer from being forced to pay monopoly prices. The combination of moving these companies into the private sector with its cost disciplines, of gradually increasing competition and the role of the regulators in the non-competitive areas, resulted in prices for the consumer falling by 30% in real terms in gas and electricity and by 50% in telecom. In addition, all these sectors have become innovative, offering greater choices for the consumer.

The approach in the Utilities Bill is different and involves using the regulator to provide protection for the consumer, even when it is clear that a particular sector or part of a sector is fully exposed to competition and a competitive market has emerged. The Bill envisages using the regulators to deliver the government?s social and environmental objectives.

Although the government?s intentions are well motivated the outcome will ultimately be harmful to the consumer. The higher costs of regulation and potential for huge new social obligations to be imposed on utilities will result in higher costs for companies, which will inevitably be passed on to the public.

In addition, the regulators are to be given powers to impose unlimited fines on companies which, given the new Competition Act can impose fines of up to 30% of a company?s turnover, could be crippling. The huge potential for such intervention raises the ?regulatory risk? faced by the utility companies, which in turn will raise their cost of capital. Given the very capital-intensive nature of these industries this will impose large additional costs which, of course, will ultimately be borne by the consumer.

  • Nick Gibb is conservative MP for Bognor Regis

Related Articles

Is inefficiency stealing your time and money?

Accounting Firms Is inefficiency stealing your time and money?

6m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
CIMA elects new president

Institutes CIMA elects new president

6m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Transparent currency trade: How to achieve costs visibility

Governance Transparent currency trade: How to achieve costs visibility

6m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Introduction to KPMG UK’s new leadership team

Accounting Firms Introduction to KPMG UK’s new leadership team

6m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
EY appoints head of UK Infrastructure Asset Intelligence practice

Accounting Firms EY appoints head of UK Infrastructure Asset Intelligence practice

8m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
FRP Advisory expands operation with new office, partner appointments

Accounting Firms FRP Advisory expands operation with new office, partner appointments

10m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Magma Group announces merger, partner promotions

Accounting Firms Magma Group announces merger, partner promotions

10m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
MHA MacIntyre Hudson advises on management buy-out

Accounting Firms MHA MacIntyre Hudson advises on management buy-out

10m Emma Smith, Managing Editor