Who said what to whom?Greg Barker, the Energy and Climate Change Minister, has increased the cash incentives offered to people taking up the government’s energy efficiency scheme, the Green Deal. Payouts for solid wall insulation have risen from £650 to £4,000 and the amount available for installing double-glazing has doubled.
What does it mean? People now only need to invest a third of the total costs themselves to get this public money. The aim is to drive up the use of the scheme, by splashing the cash that has been left unspent by low take up hitherto. The commitment we’re looking at is the 2010 pledge by Chris Huhne (then Secretary of State) that the increased demand for energy efficient homes would create 100,000 jobs within five years.
What could go wrong? What hasn’t gone wrong. While over 100,000 households have applied for assessments under the Green Deal—essentially a free quotation on what you could have done and at what cost—less than 9,000 have gone on to make improvements and claim the cashback. The total amount claimed is around £2.5m, which falls a long way short of funding 100,000 new jobs. Household assessments have also fallen off.
When will we know?extra money is only on the table until the end of June this year. The short deadline combined with the increased cash incentives suggest that this is a last attempt to boost take up rather than return the money earmarked for the scheme to the Treasury. We will know soon if it has worked. But, already wider economic data suggests that household savings are being cut into for other spending, suggesting that finding even a third of the costs may be a problem for many.
Equally, those households that could invest will likely be richer than the average, so this will effectively amount to an increase in public spending for richer households at the same time as poorer households continue to see reductions in public spending for them. The amounts involved will be small, for the same reasons that take up has already been limited – the hassle factor, the lack of faith among people that better insulation will decrease their energy bills – but this is nevertheless a breach in the principle that the Coalition has tried to follow in ensuring that the effects of austerity are progressive.
Commitment rating: 1 Why should a scheme that has so far failed dramatically to change peoples’ behavior suddenly gain momentum. This is a last throw of the dice made possible by leftover funds due to the low take up until now. Perhaps soon the government will be able to find a better use for it.
What does it mean? People now only need to invest a third of the total costs themselves to get this public money. The aim is to drive up the use of the scheme, by splashing the cash that has been left unspent by low take up hitherto. The commitment we’re looking at is the 2010 pledge by Chris Huhne (then Secretary of State) that the increased demand for energy efficient homes would create 100,000 jobs within five years.
What could go wrong? What hasn’t gone wrong. While over 100,000 households have applied for assessments under the Green Deal—essentially a free quotation on what you could have done and at what cost—less than 9,000 have gone on to make improvements and claim the cashback. The total amount claimed is around £2.5m, which falls a long way short of funding 100,000 new jobs. Household assessments have also fallen off.
When will we know?extra money is only on the table until the end of June this year. The short deadline combined with the increased cash incentives suggest that this is a last attempt to boost take up rather than return the money earmarked for the scheme to the Treasury. We will know soon if it has worked. But, already wider economic data suggests that household savings are being cut into for other spending, suggesting that finding even a third of the costs may be a problem for many.
Equally, those households that could invest will likely be richer than the average, so this will effectively amount to an increase in public spending for richer households at the same time as poorer households continue to see reductions in public spending for them. The amounts involved will be small, for the same reasons that take up has already been limited – the hassle factor, the lack of faith among people that better insulation will decrease their energy bills – but this is nevertheless a breach in the principle that the Coalition has tried to follow in ensuring that the effects of austerity are progressive.
Commitment rating: 1 Why should a scheme that has so far failed dramatically to change peoples’ behavior suddenly gain momentum. This is a last throw of the dice made possible by leftover funds due to the low take up until now. Perhaps soon the government will be able to find a better use for it.
