Biased BBC contributor Alan writes….

“The Today programme interviewed Phil Bentley from British Gas and Chris Huhne the energy and climate change minister this morning.

Prices are rising and the Today programme wants to know why. The government also wants to know why.

‘David Cameron calls for action to cut energy bills.  The government needs to work “harder and faster” to bring down energy bills, the prime minister has said ahead of a summit on gas and electricity prices.’

Throughout the interview the ‘inconvenient fact’ of ‘why’ is skirted around with euphemisms and wilful blindness.The prices are rising so dramatically because of government green policies….that is to pay for all the massive subsidies to build wind farms and to handsomely reward wealthy farmers and landowners to allow these unwanted intrusions in the landscape onto their land.

Naughtie uses every phrase he can dream up to avoid using ‘carbon tax’ or ‘green tax’….he tells us that price rises are to pay for energy from ‘different sources’ or that they are to ‘secure energy supplies’ or ‘government policy in all its forms’ will increase prices but eventually he raises the subject but only tentatively and only once and fails to chase Huhne as he sidestepped it…’a commitment to a reduction in emissions means prices will go up will it not?’.

Huhne dodges the question and claims prices are rising to secure supplies and er…to protect us from price rises… does that work? ….presumably build a windfarm and charge us the earth up front in subsidies to these energy companies and then keep charging us that rate but don’t increase prices unless ‘unusual circumstances’ dictate a rise.

Isn’t that just like the shop that raises prices just before a ‘sale’ and the sale price is actually the same price on the sticker before the ‘sale’? Why is the BBC so reluctant to mention green taxes?

Does it not want the public to know just how much of their money is being ploughed into this unproven theory and lining the pockets of already wealthy people, especially in times of economic crisis.

Does it think people might object and start looking even more closely at the realities of climate?