Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report February 2019
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report — February 2019 Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report February 2019 1 Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report — February 2019 CONTENTS 1 Introduction 03 2 SESSION 1: How We Engage with Stakeholders 04 3 SESSION 2: The RIIO-ED2 Framework 05 and Stakeholders’ Expectations of WPD 4 SESSION 3: Stakeholder Priorities for RIIO-ED2 07 5 SESSION 4: Being a Responsible Business: 09 Building a Social Contract 6 SESSION 5: Smart Future and New Possibilities 11 7 Afternoon Surgery: Connections 14 8 Afternoon Surgery: EVs and Wider Innovation 15 9 Afternoon Surgery: Network Charging 16 10 Afternoon Surgery: Consumer Vulnerability 17 11 Appendix 1: Attendees 19 12 Appendix 2: Workshop Feedback 23 2 Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report — February 2019 1 | INTRODUCTION In February 2019, Western Power Distribution (WPD) hosted a series of six workshops in locations across 1 Introduction 03 its network. This report details outcomes from the six workshops in Newport, Bristol, Bodmin, Birmingham, Nottingham and Lincoln. 2 SESSION 1: How We Engage with Stakeholders 04 The workshops were aimed at gathering feedback from the company’s stakeholders on the following topics: WPD’s RIIO-ED2 engagement plan; the RIIO-ED2 framework and stakeholder expectations of the 3 SESSION 2: The RIIO-ED2 Framework 05 company; stakeholder priorities for RIIO-ED2; being a responsible business and building a ‘social contract’; and Stakeholders’ Expectations of WPD and smart future and the transition to Distribution System Operator (DSO). In addition, specific surgeries were hosted on the subject of connections; consumer vulnerability; electric vehicles and wider innovation; 4 SESSION 3: Stakeholder Priorities for RIIO-ED2 07 and network charging. All of the workshops began with an introduction from Alex Wilkes, Stakeholder Engagement Manager. 5 SESSION 4: Being a Responsible Business: 09 Each of the workshop sessions were introduced with a short presentation from members of the WPD team, Building a Social Contract followed by roundtable discussions and electronic voting. A total of 330 stakeholders attended the workshops. Details of the organisations that were represented 6 SESSION 5: Smart Future and New Possibilities 11 along with the regional split and stakeholder types can be found in Appendix 1 of this document. EQ Communications (EQ) was appointed as a specialist stakeholder engagement consultancy to independently 7 Afternoon Surgery: Connections 14 facilitate the stakeholder workshop on behalf of WPD and neutrally report back on the outputs. The full presentation can be found at https://www.westernpower.co.uk/downloads-view/29722 with the 8 Afternoon Surgery: EVs and Wider Innovation 15 agenda for the day on slide 4. 9 Afternoon Surgery: Network Charging 16 10 Afternoon Surgery: Consumer Vulnerability 17 11 Appendix 1: Attendees 19 12 Appendix 2: Workshop Feedback 23 3 Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report — February 2019 2 | SESSION 1: HOW WE ENGAGE WITH STAKEHOLDERS Summary of the discussion Alex Wilkes introduced the opening workshop session at all six workshops, talking stakeholders through the business planning process and WPD’s engagement timeline for RIIO-ED2. Alex’s presentation can be found at https://www.westernpower.co.uk/downloads-view/29722, on slides 8–17. There was a good split of stakeholders across the six workshops. The most well-represented group were local authority officers / elected representatives with 21% of all attendees, followed by energy / utility companies with 13%. 16% of those who attended identified themselves as ‘other’ when asked to pick the stakeholder type that best described them. These included engineering consultants, housing developers, social housing providers and those working in the infrastructure sector. There was little regional difference in the make-up of those who attended across the six workshops, with the exception of Bodmin, where 16% of attendees described themselves as environment representatives, and Lincoln, where 14% of attendees were connections customers. Naturally, stakeholders came to the workshop for reasons relevant to their roles. Those from local authorities were particularly keen to discuss the growth agenda. Many were under pressure to deliver exacting housing targets and they were keen to see how WPD could help them to facilitate this. In addition, they were keen to discuss the projected increase in electric vehicle (EV) take-up and the network reinforcement that would be needed to accommodate this. Many attendees were also keen to discuss the transition to DSO and what this means for them. Those in Bodmin and Lincoln were particularly interested in how the network could facilitate more renewables, which is unsurprising in light of the roles of many of the attendees at these workshops. The majority of stakeholders (77%) told us they were keen to be involved in WPD’s RIIO-ED2 consultation programme at key points in the process, especially at stage 1 (the first draft published in September 2020) and at stage 3 (the initial submission of the Business Plan to Ofgem). While it was thought that the best way to ensure that stakeholders from different backgrounds could be involved in the ED-2 consultation was to employ a range of methods, it was clear from discussions that stakeholders were of the view that there is no substitute for face-to-face engagement, with attendees highlighting the limitations of feedback that is elicited through online consultation alone. When asked how they would like to participate in the ED-2 process, almost one third of stakeholders (30%) suggested stakeholder workshops as the best method of engagement. It was added that workshops on specific topics, such as EVs, battery storage and community energy, would be a welcome addition to the consultation programme. Stakeholders suggested a number of stakeholder groups whose feedback should be sought on WPD’s plans for ED-2. Suggested organisations included local enterprise partnerships (LEPs); social housing providers; trade bodies, including those representing community energy; battery storage companies; EV and EV charge point manufacturers; and the NHS. 4 Western Power Distribution Stakeholder Workshop: Summary Report — February 2019 3 | SESSION 2: THE RIIO-ED2 FRAMEWORK AND STAKEHOLDERS’ EXPECTATIONS OF WPD Summary of the discussion Paul Branston, Regulatory and Government Affairs Manager, introduced the second session at all six of the events. Paul explained the key features of the current Business Plan period and outlined Ofgem’s proposed changes for RIIO-ED2. Paul’s presentation can be found at https://www.westernpower.co.uk/downloads- view/29722, on slides 18–31. Although stakeholders were broadly of the view that WPD delivers good value for money for the services it provides (when stakeholders were asked to vote out on this, the mean score was 7 out of 10), it was noted several times that the majority of customers have little knowledge of the role of their DNO or the services it delivers, such as maintaining the Priority Services Register or the 105 emergency number. It also clear that some stakeholders have limited knowledge of WPD’s costs and services. When asked to vote according to their level of knowledge, the mean score across the group as a whole was 6 out of 10. Those submitting feedback online had a similar level of knowledge, with an average score of 5.8 out of 10. Local authority representatives had the least knowledge of all stakeholder types represented, voting 4.9 out of 10 in answer to this question. It was commented a number of times that the company should make their costs and services clearer to customers, for example, by including a pie chart on bills to illustrate how customers’ money is spent. There was some support for WPD’s six current strategic outcomes. However, it was felt by some that they are, perhaps, not forward-looking enough and that they should place a greater emphasis on innovation. It was also commented that stakeholder engagement, the transition to DSO, EVs, reducing emissions and facilitating the growth agenda should have their own categories, given their importance. Stakeholders were asked to comment on the three overarching outcome categories proposed by Ofgem: ‘Meet the needs of consumers and network users’; ‘Maintain a safe and resilient network’; and ‘Deliver an environmentally sustainable network’. Most felt that these headings were too vague, which might make it difficult for stakeholders to find sections relevant to them. It was also felt that some outputs such as ‘keeping the lights on’ could easily sit under more than one category. The point was made a number of times, however, that the structure of the framework wouldn’t make any real difference to customers. In terms of how WPD should respond to the proposed changes in Ofgem’s framework, there was very little support for the company limiting its outputs to only include those that fall within the three output categories. According to the electronic vote, only 3% of stakeholders were of the view that this was the right approach. The preferred approach, winning 63% of votes from workshop attendees and 69% from online participants, involved the company developing a pool of outputs stakeholders want it to deliver, structuring these within Ofgem’s framework, and then promising to deliver any that don’t fit as ‘wider commitments’. This approach proved particularly popular among stakeholders working in the charity sector, 88% of whom voted for it. There was a feeling that certain outputs, especially those that are classed as social obligations, are vitally important, and that these should not be omitted just because they do not fit under Ofgem’s category headings. In order to ensure that these areas are not neglected, it was thought that any wider commitments ought to have measurable targets against them. It was also suggested that certain wider commitments should be regional in nature, as WPD’s outputs may differ according to the area where they are being delivered – something that is likely to become more pronounced as a result of the transition to DSO.