I'm guessing that's your prediction of the result arising from his plan to freeze prices after the election?

i.e. That the energy companies will get their increases in early?

Whoops, wrong again.

Yes. There will be the inevitable increases before then anyway, but they will have to get the prices to 2017 levels in 2015, so they will just get there quicker and stay there for a couple of years. Not sure that the policy would even be legally enforceable.



Whilst it will hit the Big 6, they are most able to soak up any financial hardship for a couple of years; but many of the smaller players in the market will not be able to - so there will probably be another round of mergers and takeovers of the smaller companies, reducing competition and strengthening the oligopoly of the Big 6.



Has he thought about the staff in energy companies who can now expect not to get a pay rise for 20 months?



Having said that, Cameron's Energy Policy is not much better or well thought through.

not forgetting the inevitable big rise in 2017 when the price controls end.

As opposed to the demonised public service workers and the low paid (the two are one and the same on occasion) who haven't had a rise in years anyway?



The rising cost of utility bills is one reason why the cost of living has risen so much – to fund private profits.



We need to stop one group of workers saying that nothing can be done because of their wages when that affects another group of workers.



The real question should be why any worker should have seen their pay decrease over the last few years in relation to the cost of living, and what a government should do about that.



According to the ONS in November 2012, rises in the cost of living have outstripped wage rises for 12 straight years. Utility bills are a huge part of that problem.



In the last year or so, even posters on the [iTelegraph[/i forums have been noting that utility privatisation has damaged the domestic customer and not provided a great result. [iTelegraph[/i readers are muttering about renationalisation. That should tell people an awful lot.

I don't know if it was just Miliband's summary you listened to but Caroline Flint went into a bit more detail. The energy companies are positioning themselves in a similar way to the banks - too big to fail. There is a complete lack of transparency in the market, especially among those who are involved in production and distribution. The opportunity for fixing transfer pricing is undeniable and cannot be allowed to continue.



Rather than spelling out a firm policy, I think this more of a shot across the bows. The energy companies have been given plenty of opportunities to prove the market really is competitive and have failed miserably. I would't rule out windfall taxes or a forensic audit of the big players. And as far as the "what about a wagw freeze" argument, you'll get next to fookall sympathy from the vast majority of the population

Energy companies and their regulation are a joke. We had a gas bill today of c. £80 today of which just £18 was gas. The standing charge was £60!

For how long?

As the standing charge is obviously an annual charge, I don't get the point of your complaint, which implies you got charged that per month, when obvioulsy hat's not true

None of this is a new revelation is it ? Which begs the question of why Miliband didn't address it when he was Energy Minister in the previous government.......

Centrica have been doing a good amount of foot stomping and Violet-Elizabeth Bott "Thqueeming" these past few days starting with the threat of ruination for themselves if Labour's electioneering threat of a 20 month price freeze is ever introduced (lets not forget they have no power to do so at the moment) and in the media they have plenty of media reporters and proprietors willing to print ...



[urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24232292[/url

So clearly the threat there is that the 3.6% increase in profits in the domestic market that Centrica made last year simply by playing the energy purchase market would not be able to continue if their retail prices were capped for a period of 1 year and 8 months, I can't quite see that argument myself and I am no expert in the energy market but I have run a business and I have dealt with suppliers and end users and I know that the two things are very different, in a normal business, like one that is not essential to life, the end user controls your retail price by how much they are willing to pay, but its you who controls your supplier prices by simply not purchasing their stuff if they get too greedy - simplified its true but Centrica seem to be saying that they won't be able to do that any longer if Labours plans ever come to fruition, almost as if they will lose the ability to run a business.



They are also suggesting that they won't be able to continue with a planned £110billion investment in power stations but having read what Milliband said its fairly apparent that he is talking about a freeze in subsidies and not a stop to all subsidies, so the investment will continue albeit at the same rate for 20 months, surely ?



[urlhttp://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/431675/Centrica-bins-gas-store-plan[/url

And then, coincidentally, they throw a massive foot stomp by pulling out of two huge gas storage projects right now rather than waiting for the words "Ed Milliband PM" to be uttered with the argument that the government subsidy in the projects is not enough, the taxpayer will not pay enough for Centrica to use their own facilities (basically two big holes in the ground) to store gas.



Seems like their business is struggling along at the moment, could be a good time for Centrica to just hand British Gas back to the taxpayer and we'll get the job done without them and their threatening ways.

It begs no such question but given Angela Knight is now speaking on their behalf, it's no wonder the energy companies are trotting out that soundbite