Afternoon:
10°c
THERE are some pertinent questions to be asked about energy prices and it is to the benefit of consumers that the Prime Minister is asking them. Gordon Brown has pointed out that while gas and electricity prices rose to take account of the increased price of oil, there have been no corresponding cuts in fuel bills as the price of oil comes down. Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, has met the six big energy retailers to tell them that the Government wants prices to fall. Meanwhile, the former head of Energywatch, Allan Asher, has said that consumers' annual bills of £1,200 could be reduced by up to a third if there were reforms to the wholesale market and greater competition between suppliers. He has a point: at a time when official inflation figures are just over five per cent, some suppliers have increased gas prices by a third.
Naturally, the energy suppliers have been quick to rebut the suggestion they are fleecing their customers. They point out that they buy most supplies in advance, and their contracts reflect the prices at the time. That still leaves consumers wondering at the difference between the extraordinary speed with which retailers put up prices to reflect oil price increases and the slowness with which they respond to price falls. The cost of Brent crude has fallen by half since its peak this summer. Further, some contracts are short-term and should reflect price reductions. The companies are on surer ground when they point out that Britain has far less storage capacity for gas than France or Germany.
The big suppliers got off very lightly from a recent Ofgen report which cleared them of price fixing, though it identified other problems. But as consumer watchdogs have pointed out, it does not take collusion for retailers to match each others' prices. The whole concept of competition is, in any event, illusory for less well-off and elderly customers, less savvy about supplier switching and without access to internet price-comparison sites. The case for a review of pricing by the industry by the Competition Commission grows compelling.
School clash
DRAYTON Manor High, a popular comprehensive in Ealing with above-average GCSE results, is appealing against a ruling by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator over its admissions policy. The school was accused of turning down applications from children from nearby council estates, a claim it rejected. However, the admissions watchdog upheld the complaint, and Drayton is now appealing. It is vital that this case does not prompt a repeat of the bullying stance towards successful schools adopted by Children's Secretary Ed Balls earlier this year.
Most parents have little time for politicians who interfere with schools which are doing relatively well, instead of getting on with raising standards elsewhere. They will never believe that focusing on admissions policies should be ministers' top priority as opposed to improving discipline, tackling high staff turnover and raising standards in all schools. Certainly many parents were unimpressed by Mr Balls's attacks on faith schools over admissions and will not look kindly on a repeat performance carried out to appease Labour activists. At a time when fewer than half of Britain's 16-year-olds get five decent GSCEs, including English and maths, meddling with admissions policies seems to suggest a strange set of priorities.
Bloomsbury boost
DESPITE its academic institutions and reputation as home to artists who lived in squares but loved in triangles, modern Bloomsbury could be improved. The Brunswick shopping centre has been upgraded, and Camden council deserves credit now for trying to improve cycle routes and the lot of people on foot. Perhaps one day the visual pleasures encountered by Virginia Woolf's Mrs Dalloway on her walk through Mayfair and Westminster will be matched in the author's Bloomsbury.
