Government to appeal High Court solar ruling

[davedee]

 
http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/investments/government-to-appeal-high-court-solar-ruling/1043799

[Parky]

Try: http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/investments/government-to-appeal-high-court-solar-ruling/1043799.article

or better still: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/03/solar-subsidy-confusion-government-appeal

or you can get real time updates on current government policy on Twitter, straight from the arses mouth: https://twitter.com/#!/GregBarkerMP

[brackwell]

If i was trying to bat the governments position (which i totally disagree with) i would appeal and drag it out to April knowing that this will make the savings i intended and more probably. A one way bet. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

When poiliticians spend money like this they are just distributing one lot of taxpayers money to another lot of taxpayers-which is what they do normally. Also the extra income from the other side will help to keep quite a few people in jobs which is just another form of social security.

Ken

[davedee]

http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.rtcc.org/business/comment-real-solar-battle-in-uk-not-taking-place-at-high-court/&ct=ga&cad=CAEQARgAIAAoATAAOABAhNW_-ARIAVgBYgVlbi1HQg&cd=BWgx6S8rPfg&usg=AFQjCNHjoyCZRK0PljIXmC04Z0oGxsTenA

[Cornish Dragon]

Thank you Davedee for posting that....
I will be watching with interest
What a cock up that only a  "government "
could make on such a scale....
They have been in "power" for what 20 months
quite long enough to see this train wreck coming
and to put in place a gradual tariff reduction....
With 15k broadly middle class, middle income
jobs on the line they couldn't have handled it
any more worser.....

CU
CD

[jez54]

As an end-user who has a real problem now, which has been made ever so much worse by the suddenly rushed timescale, and consequence shortage of kit and labour, resulting from that government c*ckup, I can only agree ..... this is a brilliant article.

This outrageous idea, that "government" (is that what it is?) somehow has the right to impose retrospective legislation, has been creeping closer ever since GB single-handedly caused a large part of today's pensions crisis by stealing a large chunk of our pension pots (by taxing income earned within personal and company pension funds);  and again later when ordinary folk were punished with swingeing (so-called) "road tax" increases for the sin of having made their rational choice of motorised transport over 5 years previously ... but even today many years before said motor can be scrapped without adding to, not reducing, the overall carbon cost to the planet.

Citizens, you know what to do.  Write to your MP, using the article as a guide, and demand that they vote for a rational and predictable future for this industry, and for the jobs of all those in it.

[Ian-LS]

statement on DECC website

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/fits_case/fits_case.aspx

"The Court of Appeal has not yet decided whether to give permission for an appeal or made a judgement on the FITs case. The Court will wrap up the decision on permission for an appeal and a possible judgement if an appeal is allowed in the next few weeks. Once the outcome is known we will consider our options and make an announcement on the way forward to provide clarity to consumers and industry."

[CeeBee]

statement on DECC website

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/fits_case/fits_case.aspx

"The Court of Appeal has not yet decided whether to give permission for an appeal or made a judgement on the FITs case. The Court will wrap up the decision on permission for an appeal and a possible judgement if an appeal is allowed in the next few weeks. Once the outcome is known we will consider our options and make an announcement on the way forward to provide clarity to consumers and industry."

Has anyone got any idea what actually happened at the court today - was the hearing public? How did what we believed was due to happen, i.e. (from various sites):

"The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has applied for permission to appeal against the High Court ruling and this case will be heard today (i.e. 13th Jan 2012). If permission to appeal is granted the appeal itself will be heard on the same day."

turn into the reported indecision? It appears that they haven't even decided whether to allow an appeal, let alone hear the actual case or decide on it.

Incidentally, I got an email from DECC themselves, reporting the same as on their website - I must still be on one of their lists from a 'consultation' ages ago. I'm afraid I didn't bother to respond this time - I've been beaten into submission, i.e. assuming that responding makes no difference whatsoever.

[Ivan]

My experience of court processes is that the courts will always drag it out - each indecisive hearing adds £thousands to the legal bill. Courts also seem to have a duty to ensure that solicitors and barristers get a good slice of the action.

[BruceB]

Has anyone got any idea what actually happened at the court today -

Reading a few things this evening, as I understand it the 3 judges heard the arguments from either side, but reserved judgement neither deciding whether to grant permission to appeal nor therefore deciding the actual appeal itself.  The options seem to be:

- they refuse the Government permission to appeal.  Solar Cos and FOE win.

- they grant the Government permission to appeal, but then deny the appeal.  Government then has the option to appeal to the Supreme Court.

- they grant the Government permission to appeal and allow the appeal.  Solar Cos and FOE have option to appeal to the Supreme Court.

So still all up in the air really.  I have done x2 installations this week.  As prices have dropped since 12 Dec and  I had cut my margins a bit to give respectable returns at 21p, if my customers do get 43.3p they will be quids in!

Regards
Bruce

[Ivan]

I don't think the government care about winning - they just want to drag the legal proceedings on until the 31st March - which is quite easy with the UK legal system as they're only too willing to do so.

[GavinA]

I don't think the government care about winning - they just want to drag the legal proceedings on until the 31st March - which is quite easy with the UK legal system as they're only too willing to do so.

I don't think they need to drag it on that long. IMO they only need to drag it on until they've released the final report on the consultation, which I believe is due the end of January, then move the reference date to eg 1st Feb to comply with the letter if not the spirit of the judgement (or possibly even just move it to the 24th Dec or something just after the consultation ended).

I don't buy the argument many are making about DECC needing to lay any decision before parliament for 40 days because they've already done this, and the only change being made is to the precise reference data. I'm fairly sure this will be the line of reasoning DECC will use anyway, and dare anyone to challenge them on it again.

[Ted]

The procedure for changes is covered in Sections 41 and 42 of the Energy Act 2008 - which requires both houses of parliament to approve a draft of proposed changes to the Standard Licence Conditions (this is where the FiTs rates are defined). This hasn't happened yet.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/32

42 Power to amend licence conditions etc: procedure

(1)Before making a modification, the Secretary of State must consult—

(a)the holder of any licence being modified,

(b)the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority, and

(c)such other persons as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.

(2)Subsection (1) may be satisfied by consultation before, as well as by consultation after, the passing of this Act.

(3)Before making modifications, the Secretary of State must lay a draft of the modifications before Parliament.

(4)If, within the 40-day period, either House of Parliament resolves not to approve the draft, the Secretary of State may not take any further steps in relation to the proposed modifications.

(5)If no such resolution is made within that period, the Secretary of State may make the modifications in the form of the draft.

(6)Subsection (4) does not prevent a new draft of proposed modifications being laid before Parliament.

(7)The Secretary of State must publish details of any modifications as soon as reasonably practicable after they are made.

(8)In this section, “40-day period”, in relation to a draft of proposed modifications, means the period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the draft is laid before Parliament (or, if it is not laid before each House of Parliament on the same day, the later of the 2 days on which it is laid).

(9)For the purposes of calculating the 40-day period, no account is to be taken of any period during which Parliament is dissolved or prorogued or during which both Houses are adjourned for more than 4 days.

(10)In this section “modification” means a modification under section 41(1).

[GavinA]

The procedure for changes is covered in Sections 41 and 42 of the Energy Act 2008 - which requires both houses of parliament to approve a draft of proposed changes to the Standard Licence Conditions (this is where the FiTs rates are defined). This hasn't happened yet.

They laid the proposed change to the FIT rates before parliament 40 days before the original reference date of the 12th Dec, and neither parliament voted against it in that period, so they have parliamentary approval to implement the change to the reduced rates already.

The only thing that's potentially changing here is the reference date, which I expect DECC to claim not to be something they need to go back to parliament to approve being as it's merely a slight delay to the original proposal.

[Ted]

I know there was a debate in the Commons about the Feed-in Tariffs generally, but I didn't think that a draft of the changes to the Standard Conditions formed part of that.  These matters have previously been handled by a vote amongst a Delegated Legislation Committee.