Issue - meetings

Option 1: Do nothing

Option 2: To agree to establish a collective energy switching scheme for the Lancaster District and for Lancaster City Council to work independently to achieve the best deal for residents.

Option 3: To agree to establish a collective energy switching scheme for the Lancaster district and to collaborate with other interested Local Authorities to achieve the best deal for residents

Advantages

·         No impact upon council resources

·         Enables the council to address economic and social impacts associated with energy price increases

·         The Council could receive a referral fee

·         Greater flexibility in setting timescales and running auctions

·         Enables the council to address economic and social impacts associated with energy price increases

·         The Council could receive a referral fee

·         A larger campaign increases effectiveness of any marketing.

·         Increased financial benefits for residents and council with a larger scheme.

·         Avoids competition for customers with other Lancashire authorities

Disadvantages

·          The council will have lost an opportunity to help vulnerable groups increase their resilience to periods of cold weather.

·         Duplication of resources with other local schemes

·         Possible confusion with other local schemes

·         Unnecessary competition for registrations with other Lancashire authorities

·         Reduced flexibility to organise registration periods and auction dates

Risks

·         Lost opportunity to help the residents of the Lancaster district reduce their energy bills

·         Lost opportunity for the council to benefit from a new income stream

·         Procurement: An unsuitable external organisation is chosen to operate the scheme

·         Mitigation: Risk could be minimised by undertaking a formal public tender exercise or taking advantage of another authorities procurement methodology (as per Appendix 1)

·         Reputational: The council receives negative publicity should the scheme be unsuccessful.

·         Mitigation: Public and press responses to schemes already declared have been positive and so the risk of reputational damage to the authority is considered low.

·         Low uptake of the scheme as residents prefer to be involved in a scheme operated by another authority

·         Procurement: An unsuitable external organisation is chosen to operate the scheme

·         Mitigation: Risk could be minimised by undertaking a formal public tender exercise or taking advantage of another authorities procurement methodology (as per Appendix 1)

·         Reputational: The council receives negative publicity should the scheme be unsuccessful.

·         Mitigation: Public and press responses to schemes already declared have been positive and so the risk of reputational damage to the authority is considered low.