Thursday, May 22, 2008

Pushing Tin

















Amid all the ideological spleen flying about over the unveiling of a tinplate image of Maggie Thatcher in the Senedd, it pays to take a closer look at the legacy that Thatcher has bequeathed on us here in Wales, particularly in terms of government policy.

Traditionally associated with privatisation, deregulation and the wholesale dismantling of the welfare state, Thatcherism is seen by many in Wales as something that was "imposed" on us by zealous conservative ideologues in the 1980s and much of the 1990s. But behind the rhetorical posturing of the respective political parties, things are not quite so clear-cut.

Welsh Labour, in particular, perhaps dimly aware that more than a little of Thatcher's zeal for privatisation had rubbed off onto Tony Blair and his cronies, were eager to put "clear red water" between themselves and their counterparts up the other end of the M4.

Behind this rhetoric, however, it's quite clear that for the past 5 years the Assembly government and it's London handlers has been quietly supporting a thoroughly Thatcherite experiment in energy deregulation.

This process of deregulation began in the 1980s with the privatisation of state utilities such as British Gas (1986) and the break-up of the Central Electricity Generation Board (CEGB) at the end of the decade. From the ashes of this breakup rose privatised utilities such as the National Grid and National Power. The Tories fervently believed that this deregulation would lead to greater efficiency, lower prices and greater freedom of choice for the consumer.

This ideology has largely been inherited by the Labour Party, and this shift began with the binning of Labour's historical commitment to Nationalisation - Clause IV. Over the course of the 1990s, Labour's 1992 election manifesto commitment to
renationalising
National Grid was quietly dropped.

Another key Labour commitment quickly dropped when Labour got into power was a moratorium on the building of gas-fired power stations. Labour was concerned to be seen to be reversing the Tories "Dash for Gas" in the early 1990s. By the end of 1998 this ban was watered down due to the intervention of a key player in the energy industry in the late 1990s - Enron, who splashed out £15,000 on a reception at Labour's '98 conference that year.

But Labour's love affair with gas was just warming up. Companies like Enron soon found many bedfellows in "New" Labour, willing to cwtsch up. Not least of whom was the Rt. Hon. Peter Hain. M.P.

And Peter really meant it. In his capacity as Minister for Energy and Competitiveness in Europe, Hain was given a key job. To help crack open recalcitrant European energy markets and spread the gospel of liberalisation and "competitive markets" across the continent. And a key plank in Labour's strategy of cracking the European nut was LNG.

LNG which would help to lesson Europe's dependence on the resurgent Russian bear.

But it wasn't all roses for Peter. He got his share of the bread, too. In 2007 he got a nice bung from the Cuddy Group, one of the many contractors employed on the construction of a pipeline which doesn't run too far from his house.

A pipeline which thanks to Labour's deregulation agenda is missing a significant number of safety valves, and hasn't been properly assessed by the Health and Safety Executive.

So not too close, either. Eh, Pete?

Thursday, May 08, 2008

Greenwash!

The establishment continues to trip over itself in it's desperation to paint the LNG pipeline project as being of some benefit to the rest of us.

So after ripping up half the Welsh countryside, damaging an internationally recognized Geopark, polluting an SAC in Milford Haven waterway, and, oh, by the way, locking us into a mode of energy generation that is destabilising our climate, it was almost inevitable that National Grid's pet project would receive some kind of green award.

Presenting this award, the Chair of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, Martin Evans, gushed; "To me, the important part was the installation of the pipeline so that none of the LNG that’s being imported had to be transported by road."

I mean, the fact that the Stern report points out that gas transmission is one of the most carbon intensive sectors of the economy, and the fact that the gas has to be be liquified and transported halfway across the world in giant ships is really just nitpicking isn't it?