Green Revolution Nonsense: Corbyn Wants to Nationalize UK National Energy Grid

-edited

UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn made an absurd proposal on Wednesday. He wants to nationalize SSE. Shares hammered.

The Telegraph reports Labour Power Grab Wipes £500m Off Firms.

The threat of a Labour government wiped more than £500m off SSE and National Grid on Wednesday as party plans to seize UK energy networks emerged.

Sector shares slipped as The Telegraph revealed Jeremy Corbyn wants to renationalise the £62bn network, compensating shareholders with government bonds below market rate.

SSE shares closed at a five-month low, sinking as much as 3.2pc as the City baulked at the plans. National Grid, which presents full-year results tomorrow, sank more than 2pc before halving its losses.

Labour’s official Bringing Energy Home proposal claims public ownership would spark a “Green Industrial Revolution”.

The Confederation of British Industry called the plans “hanging a ‘closed’ sign above the UK”. “The country needs policies focused on powering economic growth in the future, not revisiting mistakes,” said policy director Matthew Fell.

Support for Labour’s nationalisation agenda has slumped in recent weeks, says a ComRes poll for Water UK

ENA Members

Plan Details

For details of Corbyn's absurd plan, please see Jeremy Corbyn draws up plans to seize control of UK's energy with sweeping nationalisation of networks

A leaked Labour party document has revealed plans for a swift and sweeping renationalisation of the country’s £62bn energy networks at a price decided by Parliament. The blueprint, seen by the Telegraph, lays bare for the first time Mr Corbyn’s plan to bring all energy network companies under public ownership “immediately” following a Labour election win.

Those in Labour’s sights include the FTSE 100 energy giant National Grid, which is worth over £29bn, and the transmission arms of Big Six energy companies SSE and Scottish Power. The nationalisation agenda will also include all 19 of the UK’s smaller regional gas and power grids and the massive subsea power cables linking the UK to Europe.

The agencies will be tasked with sourcing low carbon or renewable sources for 60pc of all energy use by 2030. They will also oversee the rollout of electric vehicle charging networks and new energy storage projects across the country.

A spokesman for National Grid warned that the state-ownership plans “would only serve to delay” the huge investments needed to help the UK take a lead in the green economy.

The Price?

The Government gets to set the price paid for the takeover.

Labour Self Destruction

The Labour party is already split in several pieces over Brexit.

This move will raise more than a few eyebrows.

Corbyn in Praise of Venezuela

Recall that Corbyn is a supporter and fan of Venezuela and Hugo Chavez.

Here's an even better video, just not one that I can embed: Corbyn Calls Hugo Chavez ‘An Absolute Legend in Every Way’

Green Revolution Nonsense

I am pleased as punch with the monstrous stupidity of this proposal.

Why?

Because Corbyn just handed Nigel Farage and his Brexit Party (which I support) a second major issue on a on a silver platter.

The Brexit Party is already in first place in the polls as noted in Brexit Party Surge: Tories Drop to 5th Place in European Parliament Polls

Labour and the Tory party are both in self-destruct mode.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments
No. 1-10
Latkes
Latkes

Did his friends and family buy puts first?

Mish
Mish

Editor

This is really something, isn't it? Labour and the Tory party are both in self-destruct mode

Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear

National Grid has operations in NY state. Will those operations revert to Central Hudson? Gov Cuomo certainly is in favor of green energy, but at some point a new governor will fuss about a foreign government operating within the US.

ZZR600
ZZR600

Living in the UK I can say the government's strategy on energy doesn't exist.

Privatisation of some industries (e.g. air transport) has worked. For some, e.g. telecommunications, it's unclear (there is more competition but arguably access to broadband is quite expensive in the UK ~ $50+ per month). Rail has been a disaster, with effective monopolies increasing prices in combination with overcrowded and unreliable trains (it costs more to get a train for a 2-hr journey than to fly to most European capitals from the UK).

Energy has been very uncoordinated. 'True' privatisation would eventually lead to a single monopoly. A regulator, OFGEM, has the unenviable task of balancing the need for corporations to make profits vs the needs of the consumer to keep bills low vs the needs to protect the environment. Energy supply was all built and operated by the public sector for several decades and the lights were on 24/7, so why the need to privatise?

You now have many competing organisations involved in getting an electron from a station to your light-bulb, all of whom need to make a profit and support their administrations and management: generation, transmission and distribution, none of whom can coordinate properly because of competition rules. So we now have a mishmash of companies, all of whom prioritise making money (often by running down assets and reducing R&D spending) and the government doesn't really know what to do, as witnessed by the recent new nuclear build debacle. The majority are foreign owned so money flows from UK consumers to overseas shareholders. If energy supply is a strategic asset, it really should be under the control of one entity, the government.

Sechel
Sechel

hmm, in the short run it could reduce costs, but long term the results can't be good. outcome will be reduced investment and innovation. that said the u.s. electric grid is a mess and its largely in private hands although regulation could be hurting the incentives to undertake necessary investment.