“That this Council calls on the Government to reverse its cruel cuts to the tariff which will harm a lot of residents in Exeter.
They are planning to cut the tariff for solar PV installations with a capacity of 4Kw or less by more than 50% from 43p/KwH to 21p/kWh. For multiple installations the rate falls to 16.8p/kWh.
Their rushed cuts to the Feed-in Tariff for solar PV goes too far, too fast, hits families trying to protect themselves from soaring energy bills, put thousands of jobs and businesses in the solar industry in jeopardy, and give lie to the Government’s promise to be the “greenest Government ever””
Minutes:
Councillor Dawson, seconded by Councillor Bull, proposed a Notice of Motion in the following terms:-
“That this Council calls on the Government to reverse its cruel cuts to the tariff which will harm a lot of residents in Exeter.
They are planning to cut the tariff for solar PV installations with a capacity of 4Kw or less by more than 50% from 43p/KwH to 21p/kWh. For multiple installations the rate falls to 16.8p/kWk.
Their rushed cuts to the Feed-in Tariff for solar PV goes too far, too fast, hits families trying to protect themselves from soaring energy bills, put thousands of jobs and businesses in the solar industry in jeopardy, and give lie to the Government’s promise to be the “greenest Government ever”.”
Councillor Dawson drew Council’s attention to the number of jobs that would be lost in one of the few remaining growth industries, particularly in the South West. She emphasised the detrimental impact this would have particularly on families, by increasing energy bills. Councillor Bull spoke on the great success of the Feed-in Tariff scheme and questioned the need for the cuts in the tariffs.
Councillor Hobden, seconded by Councillor Taghdissian, proposed the amendment of the motion to read as follows:-
“That this Council calls on the Government to take the following views of Exeter City Council into account in its consultation on Feed-in Tariffs:
Council notes the current government consultation on changes to the “Feed-in Tariff” scheme, which is helping to fund photovoltaic (PV) installations, and is concerned that:
1. The halving of the tariff at short notice is causing problems for suppliers and local authorities alike
2. The reduction in systems being installed mean less jobs will be created
3. “Stop-start” policy changes undermine the government’s aim to create new green industry and low-carbon energy supplies
4. The proposal to apply a lower tariff to multi-installations could exclude further tenants from the benefits of PV installations on their homes.
Council therefore agrees to write to the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and relevant Ministers of State asking that:
1. The Tariff is reduced progressively over a longer period to enable the industry and householders to adjust but not before April 2012.
2. A Community Tariff is established, ensuring Councils and other Social Housing providers are excluded from the lower Tariff proposed for multi-installations, so that more households in fuel poverty can benefit from free electricity”.
Council also resolves to copy relevant correspondence to the Local Government Association (LGA) so the LGA can make full use of all examples in its on-going lobbying work with the Government. “
Councillor Hobden reported that the current level of tariffs was not sustainable, did not provide value for money and restricted the amount of money available for other energy schemes. In proposing the amendment, she felt that the Council should respond to the Government consultation in a constructive rather than confrontational manner. Whilst accepting the merit of expressing the Council’s concern, Councillor Taghdissian supported the view that the wording of the original motion was unlikely to elicit a sympathetic response from the Government, preferring the more comprehensive wording of the amendment. Another member commented that the scheme remained generous despite the reduction in tariffs.
Other Councillors reported that the Government had already been lobbied on the issue and considered the consultation to be a “sham” exercise since the Government appeared to have made decisions already in relation to the tariffs prior to the end of the consultation period. Members made reference to the broad political support for the scheme and emphasised the negative economic and environmental effects of the change, noting particularly the important impact of low carbon energy supplies on climate change.
The amended motion was put to the vote in the terms set out above and carried on the Lord Mayor’s casting vote.