Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Goldacre on Nurse | Main | More Horizon coverage »
Monday
Jan242011

Greens want your pension

The Confederation of British Industry appears to have designs on your pension, which it thinks should be spent on green boondoggles. This is from the British bosses organisation's latest press release (H/T Damian Carrington).

"Some bold initiatives would be in order. For example, rebuilding large parts of the nation’s power generating industry will require more investment capital than the market left to itself is likely to supply. So I would favour the development of a green investment bank designed to channel long-term finance from the pensions institutions into energy infrastructure – not easy to do, but perfectly possible with a bit of imagination and courage.

Yes, that's right. Your pension manager doesn't want to invest in the green scam, but with a bit of "imagination and courage", for which I take it we should read "compulsion", all difficulties can be overcome.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (20)

"rebuilding large parts of the nation’s power generating industry will require more investment capital than the market left to itself is likely to supply"

Especially if it is asked to finance schemes that won't actually work. How does the CBI expect to get round that..?

Jan 24, 2011 at 6:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

When I was taking out a SERPS< i had a choice of either the govt looking after my money, or a private institution. I naturally opted for the latter. Seems like now you wouldn't have much choice.

Jan 24, 2011 at 6:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

We have politicians LIB/LAB/CON who all know how to spend our money - including a huge amount we actually don't have.

I just want the CBI to concentrate on making some - somebody has to for goodness sake.

Bank shares sliding today - because of the threats facing them. I don't like bankers much, but the finance sector as a whole still pays 20% of the tax into UK plc. Also as taxpayers we would like our money back - kicking the banks is "nose and face" territory.

Time for us all to move on.

Jan 24, 2011 at 6:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterRetired Dave

Funny, it was precisely this aspect that got me really interested in AGW.

When the 2008 Climate Change Act was passed I discussed with a financial/analyst guy if it might present investment opportunities. After a few months research we independently came to the same conclusion. The emperor has no clothes.

Jan 24, 2011 at 6:38 PM | Unregistered CommenterGreen Sand

The crazed thing about all of this "green investment" is that without the correct system of subsidies/taxes (the incorrect like Feed in Tariffs, the correct like Pigou taxes say) then there won't actually be any returns to such green investments.

But if you do have the correct system of subsidies/taxes, then the market alone will happily fund all you want, because there will be returns. "Green investment" schemes either won't work at all or simply aren't necessary.

Jan 24, 2011 at 6:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterTim Worstall

Trade associations have a structural weakness in that the members all have businesses to run, so they employ bureaucrats to run the association for them. The bureaucrats then get delusions of grandeur - "I speak for the xyz industry" - even though typically they are not entrepreneurs and have never run a real business. It is an almost irresistible temptation for a jack-in-office at the CBI to strut around telling the world how to do things - look at "Lord" Dogby Jones. (sorry I enjoyed the typo so much I have left it in).
The only way the problem can be addressed is if the major players in the CBI are made aware that the secretariat is out of control. The CBI is particularly vulnerable to this syndrome as it has a large number of members, making it hard for individual members to influence the secretariat's behaviour, and is viewed as representative of industry as a whole. Analogous to "Unite" really.

Jan 24, 2011 at 7:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid S

At the other end of the spectrum from the CBI are those finding food too expensive to pay for. Note the last two words of this paragraph of the Foresight report "Global Food and Farming Futures" released today:

6.2 The food system in a low-carbon world – policy implications ... The following points should be noted: ...
The importance of the link between mitigation policies, biofuels and the food system. Though some biofuel systems have net positive effects for greenhouse gas emissions, many first-generation biofuels do not contribute to greenhouse gas reduction but reduce the area available to grow food.The history of the introduction of biofuels illustrates the dangers of not considering all the consequences of a climate change policy, and the way they can be exploited by those with vested interests.

-- http://www.bis.gov.uk/foresight/our-work/projects/current-projects/global-food-and-farming-futures/reports-and-publications


Or as I would headline it for the BBC Vested Interests Cost Lives - Millions of Them. Strangely Pallab Ghosh didn't put it that way, in fact he didn't even mention biofuels in his report - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12249909. But an area nevertheless where I believe George Monbiot and I would agree - that we should scrap all biofuel subsidies. It's one of the reasons I prefer not to abuse the guy when I can avoid it. His opposition to carbon trading being another.


This line of thought makes me wonder about the headline. Is it really helping us to say that the greens are doing this? Why not make a different name for the vested interests the Foresight authors cite: bent, monopolistic capitalists who can't be bothered to compete fairly and couldn't give a damn about the consequences for the poorest ... palest-green-yet-blood-red in tooth and claw? OK, I accept the PR people may still need to give this some work.

The problem with the much preached-about carbon reduction imperative is that, although, as Lomborg points out, we never actually reduce emissions, it's a generator of more corrupt money-making schemes than anything the human race has ever before contrived. (I've not heard it said exactly before and I can't give numbers. But something tells me it's true.) The ultimate many-headed hydra - with fascism to me the obvious end result. (A reason I find little of Delingpole's terminology offensive, strange as it may seem to those for whom my other quibbles may seem somewhat wet.)

Well done anyway Bish for spotting this new, ugly face of the monster.

Jan 24, 2011 at 7:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterRichard Drake

Something tells me that the pension schemes for our betters, i.e. MPs and civil servants, won't be made to, ahem, enticed into investing in those bonds ...

Jan 24, 2011 at 7:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterViv Evans

I think Robert Maxwell tried to use a little imagination and courage with pension funds.

Jan 24, 2011 at 7:56 PM | Unregistered Commentermartyn

We're being assaulted from all sides. Today I opened my management company maintenance bill; it contained an entry for terrorism insurance. Oh, and its gone up 10%.

Jan 24, 2011 at 8:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobinson

They never stop, do they? What will they think of next?

Jan 24, 2011 at 8:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterMichael Fowke

The government has already decided that the FTSE is too risky and that a set proportion of pension funds must be invested in government bonds.This can easily be adjusted to their green agenda. Best to opt out as much as possible.

Jan 24, 2011 at 8:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterPeter Whale

Robinson

Do you own a coal fired power station by any chance ?

Jan 24, 2011 at 8:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterEric Smith

@Peter Whale

Don't forget there's the new, mandatory private pension scheme coming for people who don't already have one. Quango that runs that naturally offers it's own execs rather better pension arrangements that to it's members, not to mention jobs for family and friends. See Private Eye for more details. That may be ripe for the CBI's proposed pillaging, or merging with the green bank.

Jan 24, 2011 at 9:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

And the Powers in Australia wonder why people prefer to manage their own superannuation funds even with increasing mountains of red tape being added. This is why.

Believing that anyone and everyone is out to get their hands on your pile is not paranoia, it is pragmatism!

Jan 24, 2011 at 9:38 PM | Unregistered CommenterBruce

This is a disgraceful proposal, on a par with Brown`s pensions tax which has caused the destruction of company final salary schemes. No doubt the advocates hope that no one will notice.

Jan 24, 2011 at 10:08 PM | Unregistered Commenteroldtimer

@viv Evans,

Because public pensions such as those paid to MPs are funded from taxation not investments.

I believe the BBC scheme, which has heavily invested in Green, is ultimately underwritten by the taxpayer. if their investments go TU, guess who pays?

Jan 24, 2011 at 10:09 PM | Unregistered Commentercosmic

Provided it's optional - i.e. a choice as to what type of "units" one's pension is invested in - let the Eco-Warrior Elite put its money where its mouth is.

@cosmic

Damn, just saw your Beeb comment - privatised profits, socialised losses - what nauseating hypocrites they are.

Now, if the taxpayer guarantee were to be removed .... oh my, what fun =)

Jan 25, 2011 at 1:47 AM | Unregistered Commenterdread0

A "Green Bank" would be the scam of all scams.

They coral your pension into their pot, make loans to the in crowd to chase rainbows, put those loans on the books as assets, and then create more money off the back of it, paying themselves hefty bonuses for the privilege of pillage.

Anyone under 50 who still thinks they will have a pension is seriously under-researched IMO.

Jan 25, 2011 at 9:16 AM | Unregistered CommenterFrosty

Well, in all fairness is this proposal any worse than many others that the government comes up with for wasting our money? And is it any worse that some of the ways in which existing banks have wasted our money?

Jan 25, 2011 at 10:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterRoy

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>