The Conservative Government has been caught lying about its renewable energy targets again.
And look who’s the minister responsible. Amber Rudd… isn’t she the one who sat stony-faced on the BBC’s Question Time while working mum Michelle Dorrell took her – and the Tory Government – to task for lying about tax credits whilst planning to plunge her, and millions like her, into poverty?
Yes she is.
The energy secretary, Amber Rudd, has been accused of misleading the public after a leaked letter revealed that the UK is predicted to fall short of its European Union obligations to get 15% of its energy from renewables by 2020.
The letter from Rudd, which was obtained by the Ecologist magazine, discloses that the department’s internal forecasts say the UK will only manage to get about 11.5% of energy from renewables by that point, but adds that “publicly we are clear that the UK continues to make progress to meet the target”.
The disclosure is particularly explosive because the government has been cutting subsidies for solar and wind energy, while maintaining that it is on course to meet its international targets.
Source: Energy minister expects UK to miss renewables target, leaked letter shows | Environment | The Guardian
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
All new building developments, whether private or public should be denied unless ADEQUATE solar panels are included in the application and councils should be enforced to only pass such applications where they are included, however such developments should not be allowed on rural or farmland.
Misleading the public?……lying? Naaahhh Cons don’t do that sort of thing. Just another nail in their “we do transparency” coffin.
The odds are stacked against renewables, these are actions to protect the Big Six… I can’t think of another reason for it.
As a director of a community Energy company we will be scratching our heads now on how to devise projects that are investable.
Fit cuts, SEIS removal, RHI only running until March only large scale projects will be able to stack up financially.
Subsidies are being removed from renewables, supposedly to make them compete on even footings with other energy generation (nuclear/fossil fuels). Yet Nuclear has just received the huge subsidy for Hinkley Point C and (I believe) 2 other nuclear generators, and fossil fuels continue to get massive subsidies (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/24/growth-climate-change-fossil-fuel-subsidies-treasury-uk-oil-gas-renewable-energy)
There should be parity – either subsidies for renewables and non-renewables, or no subsidies for either! My preference would be the former, since removal of all subsidies would likely result in massive energy price rises, which would encourage those with the means to invest in renewables (good), but would disproportionately affect the poorest in society (very bad!)