Eon launched its winter affordability scheme last September, which offers up to 50% bill cuts and debt write-offs for customers on low incomes or with certain medical dependencies. While undoubtedly making a difference, the scope of the initiative is limited and Eon can only do so much in isolation. I want to understand Norbury’s views on more impactful interventions on affordability, including Ofgem’s consultation on reform of standing charges.
He approaches the question with caution: “The debate around standing charges is a subset of a debate around affordability. You have to be very mindful that the argument that standing charges should be abolished and those costs reflected in the unit rate has pros and cons to it. If you are somebody who has medical care at home or if you live in a badly insulated property that is leaking heat then energy consumption can be in relative terms disproportionately high. And the application of those costs to the unit rate could actually have the opposite effect of that which you’re trying to achieve.”
He appeals for a more holistic approach to affordability, for example linking standing charge reform to a social tariff. While Eon has been one of many retailers making the case for targeted energy bill support over the years, Norbury admits there is little consensus on what form this should take.
His view is that “mechanisms and entities” should be created to identify and support vulnerable customers “in such a way that you bring them back into a place where they can afford to participate in the energy market”.
“There is a model in the Dutch market where a social tariff is co-funded between the public and private sector,” he explains. “Customers for whom affordability is a challenge are able to access a discounted tariff. The administration of the scheme sits with a third party, which is the Dutch equivalent of the role Citizens Advice plays here. That is there to bring a degree of impartiality but also to improve the reach of that support, perhaps to customers who would not otherwise trust the state or trust the energy company.”
He adds: “That third party also has the capability to not only provide a discounted tariff but to support those customers and to bring them back into a place where they can afford to participate. Whilst there’s an awful lot we (energy retailers) can do, that is a capability that inherently is not core to our business.”
Norbury says he could envisage Citizens Advice playing a similar role in the UK.
However, he cautions: “If that imperative to support those customers struggling with affordability, to bring them back into a place where they can participate, doesn’t exist in a [social tariff] model then the risk is that you create a degree of energy apartheid. Because those customers who are in receipt of support become ultimately segregated from the mainstream energy market.
“What we need to ensure is that the targeted support that exists or the energy efficiency schemes that are in place are directed towards those customers who need it most, to enable them to reintegrate with the market.”
We invested even when we were making a loss
Norbury’s vision of a social tariff seems to accept my earlier assertion that there is a trust deficit between energy suppliers and customers. This has played out in press coverage over recent months as retailers have reported bumper profits, some of them for the first time ever.
Eon has yet to publish its full-year results but it did release headline information about its UK division in November. This showed sales up c35% for January to September 2023 compared to the same period in 2022, to €25.9 billion (£22.2 billion) with EBITDA almost doubling to €971 million (£832 million).
While Eon’s UK results somewhat fly under the radar, buried as they are in a spreadsheet attached to the groupwide accounts, profit hikes at peers such as British Gas have been greeted with inevitable outrage in the press.
Given the cost of living pressures we have just been discussing, how can energy retailers justify such huge profits?
“You can see from the Q3 results that we’ve had a relatively strong performance in 2023. But we remain a low margin business, with the margins that we can make through the supply of the commodity in the residential market inherently capped by the mechanism that exists within the price cap.
“Is it philosophically ok for utilities to make a profit? Ultimately, that’s a political choice, isn’t it. What I would say is that, not only are we a low-margin business but we have consistently invested hundreds of millions of pounds in the UK energy system including the years when we were loss-making.”
Here Norbury gives an intriguing hint at developments ahead for Eon in the UK, saying the company will have invested over £200 million pounds this year and that “depending on a few choices we have in front of us, that could be significantly more”.
When I ask him to elaborate on this, he simply replies “we can pick up on that in a couple of months”.
The point around investment is an absolutely fair one and something that doesn’t get the cut-through in the national debate about utilities companies more broadly that it should. But critics would retort that if Eon and other energy companies really want to rebuild trust, they will need to dig deeper and show that they have the interests of customers, not just shareholders, at heart.
Norbury says: “The challenge we’ve got ahead of us around decarbonisation of heat and transport and around flexibility, in giving customers a much greater degree of agency and control, that is the role of an energy supplier. The innovation a commercial supplier can bring into that space and the investment we can bring shouldn’t be underestimated. To make that investment and innovation requires us to have an appropriate level of profitability.”
I end the interview by suggesting that most CEOs in the energy space seem to have one particularly burning ask of government or Ofgem – the problem being that they rarely seem to share the same one. I venture that his predecessor, Michael Lewis, never missed an opportunity to promote energy efficiency as a glaringly obvious area for state support.
Norbury insists this is very much an Eon obsession and goes on to make the case for a Great British insulation drive in the context of what appears to be his own hill to die on.
“Investing in energy efficiency has a multitude of social benefits and it is something that absolutely everyone can see the benefit of but particularly the most vulnerable. It’s delivering the energy transition in such a way that creates social value.
“Yes, it’s decarbonizing. Yes, it’s creating good jobs. But we’re also bringing their bills down sustainably and making energy more affordable.
“We have to share that message that the energy transition is ultimately the way to tackle the challenge of affordability over the long term. That’s what I always come back to.”
This article first appeared in Utility Week’s Digital Weekly issue – to read the issue in full, click here.
Please login or Register to leave a comment.