N. Z. The Government’s control

29/10/2026

🚨 WHO IS REALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE BILLIONS BEING SPENT REBUILDING BRITAIN’S ENERGY SYSTEM?

The man who helped develop the Climate Change Act 2008, went on to lead Ofgem, and now heads the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is Jonathan Brearley.

Nearly two decades after that legislation, Britain faces soaring electricity costs, struggling industries, billions in grid constraint payments and the industrialisation of vast areas of our countryside.

£70 billion earmarked for transmission infrastructure alone — yet the National Audit Office says the government has not demonstrated that its chosen programme is the best way forward.

At a recent parliamentary hearing, Brearley acknowledged that ultimate accountability rests with his department.

So here is the question: Who has independently proved that dismantling and reconstructing so much of Britain's energy infrastructure is better value than upgrading what we already have?

This article follows the people, the decisions, the money and the missing evidence.

Before another field is covered in solar panels or another pylon corridor cuts through our countryside, MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

📖 READ THE FULL INVESTIGATION:
https://hopetosaveourcountryside.com/?p=3372

✍️ SIGN OUR PARLIAMENTARY PETITION — MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE!

We are calling for the suspension of Climate Change Act targets until Parliament has considered a fully independent national assessment of the financial, economic, environmental and infrastructure consequences.

We are closing in on 10,000 signatures — the threshold for a Government response. Help us get there!

👉 SIGN AND SHARE THE PETITION:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

Britain deserves affordable, reliable energy, protection for its countryside and accountability for every pound being committed in its name.

28/10/2026

BRITAIN’S ELECTRICITY BILLS: THE COSTS THEY DON'T TALK ABOUT

We are constantly told that Britain's high electricity bills are driven by the price of gas. But that is only part of the story.

Behind every electricity bill sits a growing collection of charges, subsidies and payments that most households never see explained.

Look at the figures.

In 2024/25, the Renewables Obligation scheme was valued at £7.7 billion. Transmission charges required another £4.19 billion in revenue, while balancing the electricity system cost approximately £2.7 billion.

Then there are Contracts for Difference, Feed-in Tariffs and Capacity Market payments.

These are different financial measures, and not all are caused by Net Zero. But they are part of the wider cost of Britain's electricity system — and the public deserves to know what they are paying for.

Now look at what is coming.

In 2021/22, Britain's annual transmission revenue requirement was £3.32 billion.

For 2026/27, it is £7.61 billion.

By 2031/32, NESO forecasts £13.80 billion a year.

That is more than four times the 2021/22 figure if the forecast materialises.

And this is before we ask whether the extraordinary reconstruction of Britain's electricity network is delivering value for money.

The National Audit Office has examined a £70 billion transmission investment programme, raising serious concerns about delivery and whether the chosen projects have been demonstrated to offer the best solution.

Ofgem has also rated NESO's evidence of value for money as below expectations.

Meanwhile, across Britain, farmland and countryside are being earmarked for pylons, substations, solar developments and battery installations.

The question is no longer simply how much Net Zero will cost.

The question is whether anyone has properly demonstrated that this enormous programme is the cheapest, most dependable way to meet Britain's actual energy needs.

We should not be spending billions, committing our countryside and passing ever-growing costs to consumers without that evidence being available for public scrutiny.

Our latest investigation looks at NESO's spending, senior remuneration, the grid rebuild and the increasingly urgent question of accountability.

READ THE FULL INVESTIGATION:

https://hopetosaveourcountryside.com/?p=3371

MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

SIGN THE PETITION TO PROTECT OUR COUNTRYSIDE:

Petition: Suspend Climate Change Act targets & undertake a full national impact assessment

We call on the Government to temporarily suspend the legal duties to meet the UK's statutory carbon budgets and 2050 Net Zero target under the Climate Change Act 2008 until Parliament has considered an independent national assessment of their full costs and impacts.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

28/10/2026

Future payments

27/10/2026

GAS PRICES ARE NOT THE WHOLE STORY — BRITAIN IS PAYING MORE AND MORE FOR THE GRID IT IS REBUILDING

Whenever Britain's electricity prices are challenged, the explanation repeatedly returns to expensive gas.

But the National Energy System Operator's own figures expose another major source of rising electricity costs.

In 2021/22, Britain's transmission system required approximately £3.32 billion in annual revenue. For 2026/27, that requirement has risen to £7.61 billion. NESO now forecasts £9.47 billion in 2027/28 and £13.8 billion by 2031/32.

For the average household, the transmission component alone was £39.79 in 2024/25. It is £83.24 in 2026/27 and is forecast to reach £103.24 next year.

These are charges associated with financing, operating and maintaining Britain's high-voltage electricity network. They include the recovery of investment in new transmission infrastructure.

They are not wholesale gas prices.

Britain is committing enormous resources to reconstructing its electricity system. The infrastructure must be paid for, the financing must be recovered and the resulting costs flow through the electricity market to consumers.

Gas prices certainly affect electricity prices, particularly when gas-fired generators set wholesale market prices. But gas does not explain away the sharp increase in the revenue required to support the transmission network.

Nor does it settle the separate question of whether the government's chosen generation strategy has created infrastructure requirements that a different system design might have reduced.

The government argues that building more transmission capacity will ultimately reduce costly grid congestion. That benefit must be measured. But so must the additional capital costs, financing returns, maintenance, and eventual replacement of the assets being constructed.

The relevant question is not simply how much wholesale gas costs. It is how much Britain will pay for the complete electricity system when generation, networks, balancing, backup and financing are all included.

And that is the comparison DESNZ must publish.

Blaming gas for Britain's electricity costs without accounting for the continuing growth in network charges gives the public an incomplete explanation of what it is paying for.

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE. Please sign and share below.

Petition: Suspend Climate Change Act targets & undertake a full national impact assessment

We call on the Government to temporarily suspend the legal duties to meet the UK's statutory carbon budgets and 2050 Net Zero target under the Climate Change Act 2008 until Parliament has considered an independent national assessment of their full costs and impacts.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

27/10/2026

Petition: Suspend Climate Change Act targets & undertake a full national impact assessment

We call on the Government to temporarily suspend the legal duties to meet the UK's statutory carbon budgets and 2050 Net Zero target under the Climate Change Act 2008 until Parliament has considered an independent national assessment of their full costs and impacts.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

26/10/2026

🚨 JOHN HEALEY — WILL YOU DEFEND YOUR NET ZERO CASE IN PUBLIC?

I have challenged my MP to a public, independently chaired debate on the full costs, benefits and deliverability of Net Zero.

📢 Publish the evidence beforehand. Take questions from the audience. Make the full recording available to everyone.

What will it cost? Who pays? What happens to our bills, jobs, energy security and countryside?

My 21-point challenge puts those questions directly to him. The public deserves answers supported by evidence.

WILL HE ACCEPT?

👇 Read the full challenge:
https://hopetosaveourcountryside.com/2026/10/26/public-challenge-john-healey-net-zero-evidence/

✍️ Support our call for an independent national impact assessment:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE. Sign and share.

24/10/2026

HOPE · Energy & countryside

An Energy Car Crash — Put This Leadership Under Special Measures
HOPE to save our countryside

24 October 2026

Left to right in the lead photograph: Tim Jarvis, Beatrice Filkin, Jonathan Brearley, Emily Bourne and Fintan Slye. Public Accounts Committee, 22 October 2026, approximately 10:03:43. © UK Parliament. Watch the official recording.

If this panel were running a school, I would be calling for special measures
Watching the Public Accounts Committee question senior representatives from DESNZ, Ofgem and NESO, I came away deeply concerned.

These organisations carry major responsibilities for Britain’s energy policy, electricity system and regulation. We depend on the system they oversee for our homes, hospitals, businesses and national security.

I expected a convincing demonstration that they had control of the programme.

That was not the impression their answers left me with.

If this panel were running a school, I would want an urgent examination of its leadership, a clear improvement plan and independent checks that the promised improvements were actually happening.

Our energy system deserves at least that level of scrutiny.

Lessons learned should produce results
There was plenty of discussion about learning lessons and improving the way things are done.

But listening to the answers, I remained unconvinced that the panel had demonstrated clearly enough what those lessons had changed.

A lesson should have substance. It should identify what went wrong, who was responsible, what corrective action followed and how anyone checked that the problem had been resolved.

That is basic management.

When a programme carries consequences for millions of households, assurances about improvement need to be accompanied by evidence of improvement.

Where is the grip on delivery?
A major engineering programme needs a clear sequence.

Generation needs a usable connection. Substations need equipment. New circuits need commissioning. Work on the existing network needs suitable outage windows.

The people overseeing that programme should be able to explain how those dependencies fit together, where the critical risks sit and who has the authority to intervene.

Our work across Yorkshire, Scotland, Lincolnshire, Norfolk and Kent keeps bringing us back to those practical issues.

A date in a register needs to be tested against the physical work required to deliver it. A planning approval needs to be followed through to an operating project.

The public deserves an intelligible account of that sequence.

The consequences reach our bills
The committee’s own briefing states that four of the 56 ongoing projects considered essential are forecast to finish after 2030. It also describes renewable generation expanding faster than transmission capacity, contributing to rising constraint costs.

That is a serious delivery problem.

The public needs to know what the delays mean for usable capacity, operating costs and the benefits being promised. Communities facing new substations, pylons and construction deserve to understand the complete programme affecting them.

We should be able to see what it costs, what is included, what remains missing and who pays.

Credit to the committee
The committee deserves credit for pressing the witnesses.

Clive Betts, Rupert Lowe, Anna Dixon and Chris Kane pursued questions about responsibility, delivery, costs and intervention. Their examination is exactly why these hearings matter.

We will examine the official transcript in detail, verify the wording and put the evidence alongside our regional research.

That examination should be thorough.

Energy security demands accountability
I want to see a credible plan, named responsibility and measurable results.

When leaders say they have learned lessons, they should be able to show the decisions that changed and the failures those changes prevented.

Watching this hearing left me worried about whether the organisations responsible had demonstrated that level of control.

And we are relying on this system for our energy and security.

God help us.

MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

Support petition 780321 calling for an independent national impact assessment.

Shane Oxer — HOPE to Save Our Countryside

Take action

Make them show the evidence.
Parliament should know the costs and practical consequences before the law keeps driving the programme forward

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

Comments
Leave a Reply
Write a comment...

23/10/2026

🚨 TODAY’S TARGETS. OUR CHILDREN’S BILLS.

💷 A 45-YEAR COMMITMENT — PAID THROUGH ENERGY BILLS.

Ofgem compares network funding to repaying a 45-year loan, with interest. Decisions taken today can leave our children paying for decades.

⚡ We pay for the electricity.
🔌 We finance the grid.
💸 We fund the interventions when electricity cannot reach where it is needed.

Politicians announce the targets. Families and businesses carry the costs.

Before more commitments are made, we deserve the complete account: construction, subsidies, financing, backup and balancing — alongside the consequences for jobs, energy security and our countryside.

📢 MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

Read our investigation and share:
👉 "Today’s Targets. Our Children’s Bills." (https://hopetosaveourcountryside.com/?p=3228)

✍️ Support our call for a full national impact assessment:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321

22/10/2026

💨 PAY THEM TO STOP. THEN SEND US THE BILL!

When the grid cannot carry the electricity being generated, managing those bottlenecks costs money.

Who pays? We do.

The National Audit Office warns that delays to grid upgrades will increase project and constraint costs.

🤦 How much longer will consumers pay for generation and infrastructure arriving in the wrong order?

Show us the delivery dates. Show us the full cost.

✍️ PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE OUR PETITION.

👉 "https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321" (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780321)

22/10/2026

https://hopetosaveourcountryside.com/?p=3299

Scotland’s offshore wind troubles expose the real question: what will Britain pay for weather-dependent electricity, the grid to connect it, and the reliable generation still needed when the wind s…