Michael Wheller retweeted
Labour’s answer to everything? More tax.
Ours? Back the businesses keeping our high streets alive and make it cheaper to give young people their first jobs.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Andy Burnham is facing desperate demands from his own MPs to lift the ban on North Sea drilling and scrap punishing Net Zero taxes.
Labour backbenchers have launched a cross-party pressure group urging the PM to approve Rosebank and Jackdaw, and green-light more oil and gas licences, warning “We cannot afford to stand by while decarbonisation leads to deindustrialisation."
#CostOfNetZero
Michael Wheller retweeted
A YouGov survey of financiers collectively controlling more than £30trn of assets has found that a “sharp tax rise” on companies or investors would cause a third of them to “consider pausing, reducing or stopping all UK investment over the next 12 months”.
The overwhelming majority — 78% — said the government was not giving them a strong enough reason to commit capital and 58% said the UK had become less attractive for investment decision-makers over the past 5 years.
It's investment that leads to higher growth and higher productivity. It's higher productivity that leads to higher wages. Labour's policies are leading to lower investment and stagnant wages.
It's a recipe for pauperisation of the country.
Michael Wheller retweeted
I despair. Will the the PM stop blaming our world leading education system for the NEETs crisis. Labour needs some self-reflection. Their failure to reform welfare, their tax blunders, and backbenchers demanding more benefits rather than tackling worklessness might just have something to do with it.
I agree that fewer young people should be funnelled into university degrees that leave them saddled with debt and few prospects. But this Government has zero plan to tackle dead-end degrees. We do.
Instead, the PM wants to take a sledgehammer to our education system, sorting children from the age of 14. This is a tried and tested formula for failure.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Mosques are apparently breaking charities law to endorse the Green Party.
It's just the latest example of political campaigns pandering to group-based grievances.
This is poisonous and a threat to our democracy. So why won't the Government do anything about it?
Michael Wheller retweeted
After several days during which private-sector merchants suspended truck coordination activities in protest against Hamas's taxation mechanism and threats, the merchants informed COGAT that Hamas had reportedly withdrawn its demands for payments of approximately NIS 10,000 per truck and for goods to be sold in cash. Following this development, the merchants submitted requests to resume coordination of the entry of goods into the Gaza Strip.
The merchants' reports do not, in themselves, constitute verification that Hamas has ceased imposing taxes. Coordination will resume gradually, with an emphasis on the entry of essential supplies ahead of the winter season, while strengthening oversight of merchants' compliance with their obligation to make and receive payments exclusively through bank transfers, including the documentation of transactions. These measures are intended to ensure that Hamas does not exploit the mechanism for its economic and military buildup.
Any merchant found to have made payments to Hamas will have their authorization to operate under the mechanism for bringing goods into the Gaza Strip revoked.
The resumption of coordination is being carried out in accordance with Israel's commitment to the humanitarian provisions of the ceasefire agreement.
Michael Wheller retweeted
I refuse to accept that NESO's leadership do not have serious questions to answer regarding the culture and management in the organisation tasked with keeping the lights on in Britain.
Minister Shanks' blithe dismissal of serious and legitimate allegations by whistle-blowers is another example of a government desperately trying to circle the wagons in defence of their net zero folly. 1/2
Michael Wheller retweeted
A new independent review has found employees at Britain’s electricity grid warning that the net zero transition is making it harder to keep the lights on
The investigation found “high levels of stress and concern” among grid operators “given the challenges of the net zero transition and increased reliance on renewables” and a “significant disconnect” between control room staff and executive leadership.
#CostOfNetZero
Michael Wheller retweeted
COGAT continues to coordinate the entry of essential equipment into the Gaza Strip as it ramps up efforts to bring in winterization equipment, in coordination with the international community.
Last week, among other items, the following equipment entered under the safety mechanism in collaboration with the international community:
⛺️ Entry of more than 8,000 tents
🧤 Entry of more than 250 trucks carrying winter equipment
🔧 Maintenance of water and power lines and sewage drainage from displaced persons camps
🏥 Approval of 3 mobile clinics for IMC
💉 Approval of 7,500 tetanus vaccine doses
Together with UN agencies, international organizations, and donor countries, Israel will continue to facilitate the entry of essential equipment into the Gaza Strip while maintaining necessary safety measures. Humanitarian aid continues to enter the Gaza Strip, preparing the Gazan civilian population for winter and supporting local WASH and medical efforts.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Britain can’t be a cash machine for the world.
We will stop benefits for foreign nationals and use the money to fund our defence.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Orsted is buying back the 49.9% stake in Gunfleet Sands offshore wind farm for just £15m. It sold the same stake for £200m in 2011. Looks like a good deal, but dig deeper and Gunfleet Sands is an economic basket case for all concerned. (1/10)
Michael Wheller retweeted
The BBC was set up to inform, educate and entertain - not brainwash our children.
I tried the game for myself to see if it really was as bad as this article indicates. It is.
The BBC need to explain why they are using taxpayer money to push a left-wing political agenda onto our children. Yet another impartiality failure.
School children 'brainwashed by left-wing BBC': Demand for inquiry as education website used by millions encourages pupils to back contentious open borders and Net Zero policies trib.al/57x6jrv
Michael Wheller retweeted
This is deeply concerning, and is yet another example of behaviour that erodes public trust in the BBC.
The reported involvement of civil service fact-checkers in writing articles and producing analysis for the BBC raises serious questions about impartiality and independence.
Our civil servants, who are tax-payer funded, should not be influencing news coverage by our public service broadcaster - there is a clear conflict of interest.
When you then overlay the Government’s plans to designate certain news providers as “trustworthy” and make them more prominent online it gets even more sinister. The risks of this, when the boundaries between Whitehall and the BBC are blurred, are obvious.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Angela Rayner's department funneled taxpayer money to pro-migration, anti-right wing, anti-Tory activist groups.
Now, her department says that they *could* recover the money.
But will they? Taxpayer money shouldn't be spent on partisan propaganda.
Michael Wheller retweeted
The choice is simple. A Labour government which left 1 in 3 pensioners in poverty the last time they were in power.
Or a Conservative one that backs people who've worked and paid in 👇
Michael Wheller retweeted
What did John Swinney’s speech actually say about his plans for Scotland in the coming years?
Absolutely nothing - other than “trust me, it will be better with independence.”
It’s nonsense. There was no plan, no vision of how to better Scotland’s businesses, growth, jobs and households.
His speech was full of the same tired “promise” that independence will make everything better. He knows it’s a great distraction.
He celebrated sharing a stage with Sinn Fein… and wondered why it “upset some of our opponents.” Does he really need a history book?
He said they would get rid of our nuclear deterrent…but want to stay in NATO (a nuclear alliance!).
He listed at length the “free stuff”, conveniently forgetting to mention that the SNP have made Scotland the highest taxed part of the UK to pay for the giveaways.
They have no plan for pensions, but are delighted to be able to have a fight with a Westminster about them.
Talk about wanting powers over energy…but are still anti-civil nuclear and still can’t say unequivocally they support oil & gas.
His ambition and vision for Scotland is based on nothing but a lack of ideas of how to use the vast powers the Scottish government, alongside the economic and fiscal strength and support of the rUK, to make the lives of people across Scotland better today. Because they have no ideas, they need a big distraction.
That distraction continues to be the promise of independence.
Michael Wheller retweeted
The Conservative Party will always fight for our Oil and Gas Industry. We get it.
Jackdaw and Rosebank must be approved…but it can’t end there.
Let’s Get Britain Drilling and secure our future.
Michael Wheller retweeted
How many times did John Swinney mention oil & gas in his conference speech? 0️⃣
How many times did he mention independence? 3️⃣0️⃣
Thousands of Scottish workers and businesses need our two governments to back our oil & gas sector.
Swinney really needs to sort his priorities out.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Anyone still thinking that the price cap is to protect consumers should read this. The Market Stabilisation Charge is to protect suppliers. Ofgem is another regulator captured by those it's supposed to regulate.
Important News: @Ofgem’s just launched a ‘consultation’ about switching on the Market Stabilisation Charge as soon as November. It doesn’t sound a big deal, but it could be, it ain’t good for consumers and I don't want it to slip under the radar.
In a nutshell, it means if wholesale energy prices drop sharply, the cheap fixes and switcher’s deals offered will be a lot more expensive, in order to protect energy firms’ profits.
That’s because any firm taking on a new customer, including on a cheap fix or other specialist tariff, will have to pay compensation to that customer’s old supplier, if they switch. It's basically a form of switching penalty.
While technically this is a consultation, it’s one of those where Ofgem has made up its mind, but is required to consult - it will almost certainly happen. Below is my ‘first look’ explainer on this...
------------------------
How it works (simplified to make it easy to understand):
Ofgem decided to put this power back into suppliers’ licences in May, so it could switch it on quickly if needed, and now it is trying to do just that.
It means if wholesale prices drop more than 10% below the level built into the Price Cap (and remember the January Price Cap is currently predicted to be 25% higher than now), and someone switches supplier from that or any tariff, the new firm must pay the old one 85% of the drop in wholesale rates beyond that 10%.
So very roughly, say the wholesale energy in the Price Cap costs £1,000 (a made-up number, to keep it simple. This is about proportions, not exact amounts):
- If prices drop to £900, there’s no Market Stabilisation Charge.\
- If prices drop to £800, you get the first £100 drop, but 85% of the next £100 (£85) goes to your old supplier.
So almost certainly the new firm will make you pay the difference, meaning the tariff will be up to £85 more than it would otherwise have been (other factors could affect the amount, but this is a rough illustration)
In other words, the new supplier can’t pass a chunk of the saving from lower wholesale rates on to you, because it has to hand much of it to your old supplier.
Why Ofgem says it’s doing this
Its argument is that the Price Cap requires suppliers buy energy in advance. If wholesale rates fall sharply and people leave in large numbers, those suppliers would be left out of pocket, and it doesn’t want suppliers who did the right thing by buying energy in advance to be penalised.
My View
I don’t like it. This is a ‘Market Stabilisation Charge’ but the supplier market is pretty stable, and I doubt we are at the domino risk of suppliers going bust in the way they did in the early twenties. A good few energy firms have made large profits since then, and protecting them over winter by effectively dampening competition because it’s ‘not their fault’ feels raw.
After all we don’t take their profits off them when they make them ‘through no fault’. Until now, my hope had been that at some point the Middle East situation would de-escalate, wholesale rates would drop. While it would take months for that to feed into the Price Cap, other cheaper tariffs would be available to switch to. That would still happen, but the savings could be no-where near as good as otherwise.
------------
As noted, these are my provisional thoughts and this has only just come out. I will need to do more looking/thinking.
Michael Wheller retweeted
Hypersonic missiles, directed energy weapons and autonomous systems will be assessed, refined and delivered quicker than ever thanks to a @DefenceHQ and @QinetiQ project transforming how defence capabilities are tested and evaluated at the pace of modern warfare.
🎥MOD Hebrides.




























