Leccy prices up 17.74%. Blame Julia

johnboy 9 June 2012 222
wind farm

The Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission has released its final report on electricity prices for 2012-14.

For the final report the Commission undertook further analysis of the impact of the introduction of the price on carbon and this has resulted in a change to the method the Commission used to calculate a prudent retailer’s wholesale electricity costs in the final decision. The Commission is satisfied that the revised methodology is appropriate for determining the energy purchase cost in the period 2012-13. The methodology may need to be reviewed in the future to account for market developments and any other changes in the way retailers and generators are contracting with one another.

The Commission recognises that a 17.74% increase in retail electricity prices is substantially greater than retail electricity price increases approved by the Commission in previous years. The reason for this, as explained in the draft decision, is largely attributable to the introduction of the price on carbon. The price on carbon accounts for 14.2 percentage points of the approved price increase.

In making this determination the Commission also considered the likely impact of the increase in retail electricity prices on ACT households and small businesses. This analysis notes that the impact of the cost increase is proportional to a households’ or businesses’ energy usage. The analysis highlights that actions to improve energy efficiency can assist households and businesses to offset the impact of the price on carbon. The Commission also observes that both the ACT and the Australian governments have instituted compensation measures to assist households to deal with electricity price increases.


UPDATE 08/06/12 12:37: ActewAGL are getting out in front of the story and pointing out their prices are still low low low:

“While the cost of energy is going up, the ACT will still continue to have the lowest electricity prices in the country and considerably lower prices than those across the border,” said ActewAGL General Manager Ayesha Razzaq responding to today’s final electricity pricing decision by the Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission (ICRC).


UPDATE 08/06/12 12:57: Did you think Zed Seselja could miss the chance to shout “COST OF LIVING”?

Of course he couldn’t.

Today’s announcement that Canberrans’ electricity costs will rise by a whopping $273 largely because of Federal and local Labor tokenistic green schemes is a cost of living slug households simply can’t bear, ACT Opposition Leader Zed Seselja said today. Mr Seselja said many families would face much, much larger increases.

“This increase is largely attributable to the carbon tax which Katy Gallagher supports, and the ‘energy efficiency’ scheme her government introduced. On top of ACT Labor’s inequitable solar feed-in tariff scheme, it’s a triple cost hit which could be the final straw for many household budgets,” Mr Seselja said.

Erm, hang on. the final straw for many household budgets.

Is he suggesting mass bankruptcies from this? Suicides?


UPDATE 09/06/12 09:29 Andrew Barr is parroting the ActewAGL line.

[Photo by Public Domain Photos CC BY 2.0]


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
222 Responses to Leccy prices up 17.74%. Blame Julia
Filter
Order
« Previous 1 10 11 12
Diggety Diggety 7:37 pm 12 Mar 13

Anyone interested in a objective, apolitical analysis of low carbon energy techs should watch the documentary Switch. It is US focussed but very informative all the same.

Free screening at ANU this Friday:

Canberra, Australia / Friday, March 15, 7:00pm

Australian National University Green Team
Q&A with Director Harry Lynch

(Apologies for bringing up an old thread!)

deye deye 11:40 pm 15 Oct 12

Endrey said :

I’m not going to blame Julia if my electricity bills end up being 17% higher, I’m going to blame myself for being too stupid to switch of lights, appliances etc.

I just got my bill for the first full quarter of the new pricing scheme, daily usage dropped by 22% compared to the same quarter last year, the total cost of the bill was higher than last years.

snoopydoc snoopydoc 7:11 pm 16 Jul 12

banco said :

snoopydoc said :

Wow… maybe people might actually have to consider… using less electricity… ??!!!

What a novel concept.

Stop your whinging, be more efficient / intelligent with your energy usage, and find something legitimate to complain about. 🙂

Says the latter liberal……

How dare the plebs complain about price rises?

Just considering the perspective here… ACTEW reckons the average household uses a little under $1,400 worth of electricity per year. In the grand scheme of what we pay for (a) shelter, (b) food and (c) lighting and heating, it seems to me that (c) is definitely the less significant chunk of cash we’re forced to cough up to survive.

I also think it’s not unreasonable to be reminded in financial terms of the real world value of essential (and expensive to provide) services we tend to take for granted.

banco banco 6:03 pm 16 Jul 12

snoopydoc said :

Wow… maybe people might actually have to consider… using less electricity… ??!!!

What a novel concept.

Stop your whinging, be more efficient / intelligent with your energy usage, and find something legitimate to complain about. 🙂

Says the latter liberal……

How dare the plebs complain about price rises?

dungfungus dungfungus 5:54 pm 16 Jul 12

HenryBG said :

dungfungus said :

I have just received a quarterly account from Origin/country energy.
It has an endorsement which reads”NSW Govt estimates that the Federal CARBON TAX and green energy schemes add about $316 a year to the typical 7MWh household bill – see ipart.nsw.gov.au
So, there is no tarting it up; it is a TAX.
The new charges from 1/7/12 are residential supply 26.590 per unit (kWh) which is an increase of 2.14% (from 26.228) and the Service Availability charge has risen from 65.707 cents per day to 106.660 cents per day, a whopping 62.33% !
Oh, and yes, GST is added to the new rates.

If you’ve bothered to read the link I provided:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/rampaging-price-rises-to-stop-says-energy-boss-20120712-21yz1.html

…three government-owned power distributors – Ausgrid, Endeavour Energy and Essential Energy – were raking in record profits, with the largest of the three, Ausgrid, telling the state government it expected to earn $1.1 billion for the year to June 30.

The revelations that power companies are earning a return on equity of up to 21.1 per cent, well in excess of most firms, prompted outrage from welfare and consumer groups, especially given years of double-digit rises in power bills.

In some areas, prices have risen by more than 60 per cent over the past three years.

It’s a bit rich to be blaming the carbon tax for a long-running trend in these pseudo-privatised rip-off merchants who’ve been gouging the consumer for years.

I am not “blaming” the carbon tax for anything HenryBG.
The points I was trying to make is that the carbon “price” that the 300 odd biggest polluters are now paying is in fact a tax (by self assessment) and while no GST is payable at the time it is paid by the biggest polluters it then becomes an expense that has to be recovered so it is added to the various taxable supplies and services that are billed to their customers (you and me) and GST is payable on taxable supplies and services.
And don’t kid yourself that cost of infrastructure to deliver electricty is somehow free of carbon tax inputs either. There is a lot of metal used in transmission of electricity and while there may be subsidies and exemptions on metals that are produced in Australia and exported there are no such concessions for the same product which is used locally (it will be cheaper to use imported manufactured product from now on anyhow)
And what is wrong with power companies making a profit? I guess you expect your superannuation fund to make a profit for you so what is the difference?
And no, I didn’t read the SMH story by way of the link you provided as I get enough leftie propaganda direct from you without referring to the Fairfax Media versions.

HenryBG HenryBG 5:03 pm 16 Jul 12

dungfungus said :

I have just received a quarterly account from Origin/country energy.
It has an endorsement which reads”NSW Govt estimates that the Federal CARBON TAX and green energy schemes add about $316 a year to the typical 7MWh household bill – see ipart.nsw.gov.au
So, there is no tarting it up; it is a TAX.
The new charges from 1/7/12 are residential supply 26.590 per unit (kWh) which is an increase of 2.14% (from 26.228) and the Service Availability charge has risen from 65.707 cents per day to 106.660 cents per day, a whopping 62.33% !
Oh, and yes, GST is added to the new rates.

If you’ve bothered to read the link I provided:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/rampaging-price-rises-to-stop-says-energy-boss-20120712-21yz1.html

…three government-owned power distributors – Ausgrid, Endeavour Energy and Essential Energy – were raking in record profits, with the largest of the three, Ausgrid, telling the state government it expected to earn $1.1 billion for the year to June 30.

The revelations that power companies are earning a return on equity of up to 21.1 per cent, well in excess of most firms, prompted outrage from welfare and consumer groups, especially given years of double-digit rises in power bills.

In some areas, prices have risen by more than 60 per cent over the past three years.

It’s a bit rich to be blaming the carbon tax for a long-running trend in these pseudo-privatised rip-off merchants who’ve been gouging the consumer for years.

dungfungus dungfungus 3:12 pm 16 Jul 12

Mysteryman said :

HenryBG said :

Mysteryman said :

Do you know what the SNA is? Perhaps you should look it up, moron. While the carbon price is fixed, it is a tax. It’s as simple as that.

They want to treat it as a tax for their accounting purposes.

Wrong. It meets the criteria for a tax according to international standards. That’s why it is being treated as a tax.

HenryBG said :

The police do the same thing: fake firearms are treated as “firearms” for the purpose of which legsilatioln people are charged under.

Doesn’t change the fact that a fake firearm isn’t a firearm anymore than a price on carbon emissions is a tax.

That doesn’t even make sense in relation to this issue.

Makes sense to me HBG>

Baggy Baggy 2:58 pm 16 Jul 12

davo101 said :

dungfungus said :

RE: comment #199.
Baggy, please confirm (for HenryBG’s benefit) that your increased electricity charges included GST and there was no notation regarding the carbon price component.

Given that it’s only the 16th July I think you’ll find almost all of the increase is not due to the carbon tax/levy/fee/charge/toll/price….

Indeed,

My comment was more in reference to the statement that using less electricity will result in cheaper bills.

Simply, it does not.

Mysteryman Mysteryman 2:54 pm 16 Jul 12

HenryBG said :

Mysteryman said :

Do you know what the SNA is? Perhaps you should look it up, moron. While the carbon price is fixed, it is a tax. It’s as simple as that.

They want to treat it as a tax for their accounting purposes.

Wrong. It meets the criteria for a tax according to international standards. That’s why it is being treated as a tax.

HenryBG said :

The police do the same thing: fake firearms are treated as “firearms” for the purpose of which legsilatioln people are charged under.

Doesn’t change the fact that a fake firearm isn’t a firearm anymore than a price on carbon emissions is a tax.

That doesn’t even make sense in relation to this issue.

dungfungus dungfungus 2:53 pm 16 Jul 12

I have just received a quarterly account from Origin/country energy.
It has an endorsement which reads”NSW Govt estimates that the Federal CARBON TAX and green energy schemes add about $316 a year to the typical 7MWh household bill – see ipart.nsw.gov.au
So, there is no tarting it up; it is a TAX.
The new charges from 1/7/12 are residential supply 26.590 per unit (kWh) which is an increase of 2.14% (from 26.228) and the Service Availability charge has risen from 65.707 cents per day to 106.660 cents per day, a whopping 62.33% !
Oh, and yes, GST is added to the new rates.

HenryBG HenryBG 2:43 pm 16 Jul 12

Mysteryman said :

Do you know what the SNA is? Perhaps you should look it up, moron. While the carbon price is fixed, it is a tax. It’s as simple as that.

They want to treat it as a tax for their accounting purposes.

The police do the same thing: fake firearms are treated as “firearms” for the purpose of which legsilatioln people are charged under.

Doesn’t change the fact that a fake firearm isn’t a firearm anymore than a price on carbon emissions is a tax.

Mysteryman Mysteryman 2:39 pm 16 Jul 12

Jim Jones said :

Lol. Had to stretch to get that one, didn’t you? “Under the ‘SNA’ – great work.

Funny that even the newscorp journos admit that it isn’t a tax: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/this-is-not-a-bloody-carbon-tax/

And just because you’re extra thick – if you bothered to actually research, you’d see that the ABS BFS includes carbon pricing under “indirect taxation”, along with excise duty, GST & customs duty. Because it’s meets the criteria of a TAX.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/bp1/download/bp1_bst9.pdf

Mysteryman Mysteryman 2:34 pm 16 Jul 12

Jim Jones said :

Mysteryman said :

Jim Jones said :

Mysteryman said :

HenryBG said :

Now you see the confusion the results from you (and others) mistakenly calling a carbon price, a “tax”.

It isn’t a tax so stop calling it that.

It is quite simply a cost which until recently was 100% externalised.

It is most definitely a tax according to every economic definition of the word. No two ways about it.

Lol. It’s a ‘tax’ in the same way that a speeding fine is a ‘tax’.

http://www.aasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/oct_2011_ap_5.2_staff_paper_possible_financial_reporting_implications_carbon_tax.pdf

From the Australian Accounting Standards Board. Read paragraph 52. It summarises with “Based on the above, the carbon tax is a tax under the SNA”.

You should have put your “lol” after your ignorant statement. At least then you could have claimed retrospectively that you were being sarcastic.

Lol. Had to stretch to get that one, didn’t you? “Under the ‘SNA’ – great work.

Funny that even the newscorp journos admit that it isn’t a tax: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/this-is-not-a-bloody-carbon-tax/

I’ll take the word of the Australian Accounting Standards Board over “the newscorp journos” when it comes to matters of TAXATION.

Do you know what the SNA is? Perhaps you should look it up, moron. While the carbon price is fixed, it is a tax. It’s as simple as that.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 2:06 pm 16 Jul 12

Mysteryman said :

Jim Jones said :

Mysteryman said :

HenryBG said :

Now you see the confusion the results from you (and others) mistakenly calling a carbon price, a “tax”.

It isn’t a tax so stop calling it that.

It is quite simply a cost which until recently was 100% externalised.

It is most definitely a tax according to every economic definition of the word. No two ways about it.

Lol. It’s a ‘tax’ in the same way that a speeding fine is a ‘tax’.

http://www.aasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/oct_2011_ap_5.2_staff_paper_possible_financial_reporting_implications_carbon_tax.pdf

From the Australian Accounting Standards Board. Read paragraph 52. It summarises with “Based on the above, the carbon tax is a tax under the SNA”.

You should have put your “lol” after your ignorant statement. At least then you could have claimed retrospectively that you were being sarcastic.

Lol. Had to stretch to get that one, didn’t you? “Under the ‘SNA’ – great work.

Funny that even the newscorp journos admit that it isn’t a tax: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/this-is-not-a-bloody-carbon-tax/

HenryBG HenryBG 1:47 pm 16 Jul 12

While the News Limited zombies keep parroting their Master’s Voice, alternative sources of news are actually reporting on the great rip-off we’ve been suffering:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/rampaging-price-rises-to-stop-says-energy-boss-20120712-21yz1.html

THE new head of the state’s highly profitable power distributors, Vince Graham, has told staff that prices must be held to rises in the overall inflation rate – or less.

The Herald reported yesterday that the three government-owned power distributors – Ausgrid, Endeavour Energy and Essential Energy – were raking in record profits, with the largest of the three, Ausgrid, telling the state government it expected to earn $1.1 billion for the year to June 30.

The revelations that power companies are earning a return on equity of up to 21.1 per cent, well in excess of most firms, prompted outrage from welfare and consumer groups, especially given years of double-digit rises in power bills.

In recent staff briefings, Mr Graham said the level of price rises of the past few years were unsustainable, according to staff at the meetings. Staff have also been told future price rises must be kept as close as possible to the general inflation rate, which was 1.6 per cent in the year up to March.

Late last year, when he was running Endeavour Energy, Mr Graham informed the industry regulator, the Australian Energy Market Commission, customers could expect price rises ”well below those of recent years and closer to the rate of inflation for the next seven years”.

”The businesses have already been asked to review their operating and capital budgets for the next two years to reduce their costs so that future prices are kept as low as possible,” he said yesterday.

Mr Graham was recently made acting head of the government’s three network businesses. Households are facing additional price rises of as much as 21 per cent with effect from July 1. In some areas, prices have risen by more than 60 per cent over the past three years.

Mysteryman Mysteryman 12:43 pm 16 Jul 12

Jim Jones said :

Mysteryman said :

HenryBG said :

Now you see the confusion the results from you (and others) mistakenly calling a carbon price, a “tax”.

It isn’t a tax so stop calling it that.

It is quite simply a cost which until recently was 100% externalised.

It is most definitely a tax according to every economic definition of the word. No two ways about it.

Lol. It’s a ‘tax’ in the same way that a speeding fine is a ‘tax’.

http://www.aasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/oct_2011_ap_5.2_staff_paper_possible_financial_reporting_implications_carbon_tax.pdf

From the Australian Accounting Standards Board. Read paragraph 52. It summarises with “Based on the above, the carbon tax is a tax under the SNA”.

You should have put your “lol” after your ignorant statement. At least then you could have claimed retrospectively that you were being sarcastic.

davo101 davo101 12:25 pm 16 Jul 12

dungfungus said :

RE: comment #199.
Baggy, please confirm (for HenryBG’s benefit) that your increased electricity charges included GST and there was no notation regarding the carbon price component.

Given that it’s only the 16th July I think you’ll find almost all of the increase is not due to the carbon tax/levy/fee/charge/toll/price….

Jim Jones Jim Jones 12:21 pm 16 Jul 12

Mysteryman said :

HenryBG said :

Now you see the confusion the results from you (and others) mistakenly calling a carbon price, a “tax”.

It isn’t a tax so stop calling it that.

It is quite simply a cost which until recently was 100% externalised.

It is most definitely a tax according to every economic definition of the word. No two ways about it.

Lol. It’s a ‘tax’ in the same way that a speeding fine is a ‘tax’.

dungfungus dungfungus 11:35 am 16 Jul 12

HenryBG said :

dungfungus said :

HenryBG said :

Now you see the confusion the results from you (and others) mistakenly calling a carbon price, a “tax”.

It isn’t a tax so stop calling it that.

It is quite simply a cost which until recently was 100% externalised.

So, if we follow your spin Henry, we will have a Goods and Services “Price” as well as the existing Goods and Services Tax on everything from now on?

And the cost wasn’t “externalised” 100%; it was only 7% according to Combet.

Actually it would be great if we could have GSP and GST together on our receipts from now on. This would take the guesswork out of exactly how much the carbon tax (whoops! PRICE) is costing us.

I don’t know what’s so hard to understand about this – maybe The Australian should get an actual economist to write about it instead of telling you to think something that is wrong.

If I run a restaurant, I have to pay $100 every week to have my skip out the back emptied. It’s not a tax. That $100/week is a cost which I have to factor into the prices I charge. I have to pay GST on what I charge. That’s a tax.

Once again, we see The Australian fulfilling its newfound mission, not as a media organisation aiming to inform its readers, but as a political lobbying organisation aiming to misinform the dwindling flock of sheep who choose to swallow its nonsense.

Headline in Daily Telegraph today inform us readers of more propaganda:
“In one of the biggest increases since July 1, the cost of hiring mini skip bins has risen by at least $100, or 25 per cent, due to the green levy and a new state government waste charge”
You picked a good example for you restaurant argument, Henry.

Mysteryman Mysteryman 10:28 am 16 Jul 12

HenryBG said :

Now you see the confusion the results from you (and others) mistakenly calling a carbon price, a “tax”.

It isn’t a tax so stop calling it that.

It is quite simply a cost which until recently was 100% externalised.

It is most definitely a tax according to every economic definition of the word. No two ways about it.

« Previous 1 10 11 12

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

 Top
Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site