Ditching net zero to win the climate argument

So you're a major donor to the Labour Party and a big supporter of the former Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

You expected him to go on to win a second term, but couldn't finish even the first one.

I don't want to spend a lot of time dissecting all his premiership, but from an energy and climate perspective, let's start with what did he get right?

Okay.

Well, first I should say, I didn't expect him to get a second term, but I very much hoped he would.

And I think, you know, it did begin to unravel and it did begin to look very unlikely.

What did he get right? I think the big push for green energy through the AR7, AR6, lots of contracts for difference for green energy has propelled us towards the 100% green on the grid.

We might be four years away from that goal.

So that's a good thing.

I think the intention to change planning laws for onshore wind, I'm not sure that it actually went through or in a form that is useful because there was a ban and I'm not sure it's been unbanned in a completely decent way.

Yeah, so on the energy front, really, I'm stuck with the big push for green energy.

Are we going to talk about the bad things next?

Yes.

So the AR6, AR7 are the auctions that ran for offshore wind.

And the contracts for difference is really a price that is fixed.

So it's a subsidized price.

You make electricity at a price higher than the government earns.

If you make electricity at a price lower, the government... fills you up with the subsidy.

And that's, in a way, one of the driving routes to try and stabilise what has been a pretty volatile electricity market here in the UK.

But let's come to the back.

Can I comment

on that? Because first I'll say it's not a subsidy.

It is a fixed price.

And as you say, you can win and you can lose.

And overall, the government have been We're paying into this.