....Cut the subsidy, by all means. Halve it, even. Set a date for its complete removal. The industry will innovate and survive. But slicing it by 87% in one go is plain absurd.....
My local MP, Jo Churchill, is very confused. How does she equate the continued subsidy of nuclear power with her statement that:
"I believe that Government support should help low-cost, low-carbon technologies to stand on their own two feet, rather than create dependence on public subsidies. Indeed, the global transformation we need in energy will only happen if low-carbon options become cheaper without subsidy than the alternative. My personl opinion is we should reduce the number of years as we drive down subsidy reduction." [Letter to me, 13/11/2015]In this last garbled sentence she appears to be arguing for an even faster reduction in subsidies. How short-sighted can you get?