unlike (most) car buying consumers their consumption is not directly related to emissions, also there is no electricity shortage and if there was, the price rise would of itself reduce consumption.

There is a mania to reduce energy use for its own sake.
If people feel it saves them money, fine, but the reverse of the negative cutdown focus is this:
Provide any energy needed, with any emission criteria you wish to put on it.
The endless bureaucratic chasing of energy limits, energy standards, bans and “replacements” is in my view sheer lunacy.
It’s like the emperor’s clothes – noone says anything, noone stands back and takes an overall view at what is happening….

So, in general I would say that this is just more petty and idiotic chasing of consumers.
A real coherent emission policy focuses on electricity generation and transport
http://ceolas.net/#cc10x

The argument that it’s too slow and expensive just to focus on that does not hold up
http://ceolas.net/#cc201x

Ultimately -for reasons of pensioners and low income households etc like you say – targeting electrical products is likely to be preferred to electricity bill increases by pro-consumer targeting politicians,
and they might then at least see that taxation is better than bans – for them too!