| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Madam Speaker: No. That is not quite the point.I expected to get to Question 21 today--it was marked on my Order Paper--because the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is particularly good and speedy at answering questions. It is a very good Department in that respect and I am delighted with its Ministers because we always move down the Order Paper very rapidly and very briskly when they are at the Dispatch Box. Is there another point of order? No. What a pity.
Cold Climate Allowance
3.39 pm
Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray): I beg to move,
- That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for more equitable heating allowances to reflect the increased cost of domestic heating in colder climates; and for purposes connected therewith.
When I curled up in a sleeping bag in one of the rooms in the House of Commons some three weeks ago, I did not expect to be introducing this measure in adverse weather conditions. I neither anticipated nor asked for such weather, although many people will have noticed that the Government's response to this month's cold climatic conditions was much speedier than during the festive season. I refer to the states of emergency that have been declared in Dumfries and in Galloway and to the fact that Ministers have been sent by helicopter--albeit unsuccessfully--to try to deal with the problems there.
Hon. Members will recall that when I first entered Parliament in the 1970s, I argued for the eradication of fuel poverty. When I said that deaths could occur from hypothermia or cold-related illnesses, I was accused of scaremongering and probably shroud waving--as my secretary remarked this morning. We are no longer in that position. The issue cannot be relegated to the category of scaremongering: the hard facts are there for all to see.
Last year 239 Scots died of hypothermia during a relatively mild winter. I note from today's Order Paper that the hon. Member for Rochdale (Ms Lynne) has tabled early-day motion 348, which points out that, according to the Government's own statistics, hypothermia was recorded as the cause of death of more than 300 United Kingdom pensioners in 1994. Each death certificate that attributes death to hypothermia is a blot on the social conscience of all legislators.
The Bill that I am proposing is endorsed by Members of Parliament from all over the United Kingdom. We live in an energy-rich country and no one should die as a result of fuel poverty. The Government will claim that severe weather payments have been triggered this winter and that substantial sums have been paid. That is true, but payment is a lottery. The requirement for seven consecutive days of sub-zero temperatures is ludicrous. A pensioner or a handicapped child living in any part of the United Kingdom may suffer from six days of severe weather, but if the thaw comes on day seven, there will be no payment. Furthermore, the trigger stations that record temperatures often bear no geographical relationship to the areas for which they are responsible.
Severe weather payments are welcome, but they are an imperfect mechanism for dealing with reality. They should remain in place, but I believe that they should be revised and honed into a better system for dealing with exceptional weather conditions. My Bill does not aim at replacing severe weather payments. Instead, it seeks to ensure that there are automatic and continual payments for 17 weeks between December and March, for which those on basic benefits--such as state pensions, income support, family credit and housing benefit--would be eligible.
Opponents of the Bill will say that that would be far too expensive. However, I ask hon. Members what value we place on the lives of our fellow citizens. I believe that we are denying the value of life if we do not address those problems. It is important to take account of the weather
conditions in various parts of the United Kingdom. It is interesting to note that weather forecasters now predict not only the temperature but the wind-chill factor, which is more significant in many cases. I speak with some authority, living as I do in Lossiemouth. Anyone who has visited that beautiful part of my constituency knows that the wind-chill factor can be exceptional, even in non-winter months.
My Bill divides the United Kingdom into four specific zones. Zone 4 covers northern Scotland and would require an automatic payment of £11.15 per week. Zone 3 covers central Scotland, Northern Ireland and northern England--which are suffering just as much as the Borders--and produces a payment of £7.40 per week. Zone 2 covers central England and Wales, and would entail an automatic payment of £3.70 per week. Zone 1 covers the remainder of the United Kingdom. It would not produce an automatic payment--but that would not deny the severe weather payment, which is critical during cold snaps.
I shall explain the reason for zoning. In December 1994, after I had made many attempts to pin the Government down on heating cost allowances throughout the UK, the then Under-Secretary of State for Social Security said in a written reply to me that heating costs varied considerably throughout the United Kingdom.He stated that 23 per cent. extra fuel was required in Glasgow, compared with the southern English comparator, to heat a typical semi-detached house with gas central heating. In Edinburgh, 28 per cent. extra fuel was required. In Dundee, the figure was 32 per cent.; in Aberdeen it was 41 per cent.; in Lerwick it was 53 per cent.; and in Braemar it was 66 per cent. In terms of zoning, those statistics speak for themselves.
My proposals would present the Exchequer with an annual bill in the region of £700 million. The Scottish proportion would be £170 million--a cost that we have included in the dynamic Scottish National party budget. That sum represents less than 6 per cent. of the £3,000 million that is expected to accrue to the Exchequer from North sea energy resources this year alone.
The proposed payments are based on the service charge for fuel that is included in housing benefit. On a weekly basis, the allowances represent 20 per cent. in central and
southern Scotland and 30 per cent. in northern Scotland, including the island communities. The Exchequer could make substantial savings because the national health service would gain if people were unafraid of cold weather. An article in The Independent on Sundayon 14 January clearly stated that
A study conducted in Scotland found that two thirds of elderly people admitted to hospital suffering from hypothermia had heating at home, but did not turn it on. A team of seven senior doctors who undertook research in the west of Scotland estimated that hypothermia results in 4,000 hospital admissions per year. That cost could be eradicated if people felt happy about heating their homes.
The reality is fear--the fear that people cannot heat and eat, that a warm home denies a decent diet, and that people cannot afford a warm home and a decent independent life style. Our fellow citizens should never be subjected to such fears. Phrases such as "social justice" and "care in the community" are more than buzzwords or soundbites--they are commandments.
I greatly appreciate the advice offered by statutory and voluntary organisations to the vulnerable.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mrs. Margaret Ewing, Ms Roseanna Cunningham, Mr. Robert Hicks, Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones, Mr. Elfyn Llwyd, Mrs. Diana Maddock,Mr. Eddie McGrady, Sir James Molyneaux, Mr. Alex Salmond, Mr. Alan Simpson, Mr. Andrew Welsh andMr. Dafydd Wigley.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing accordingly presented a Bill to provide for more equitable heating allowances to reflect the increased cost of domestic heating in colder climates; and for purposes connected therewith: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 1 March and to be printed. [Bill 56.]
Madam Speaker:
I have selected the amendment standing in the name of the Prime Minister.
Ms Clare Short (Birmingham, Ladywood):
I beg to move,
It is clear to anyone who has studied the detail of rail privatisation that it is a project driven by right-wing ideology and not by the transport needs of Britain. The Government are willing, at enormous cost to the public purse, to wreak great damage on our rail system and to sell it off for a tiny proportion of its value. The whole process is a madness, driven by dogma and ideological zeal.
Any serious person considering the future transport needs of Britain knows that the country cannot accommodate the projected increase in car use. We must therefore enhance public transport use, and that means that we must improve the quality and reliability of bus and rail. We must get more passengers and freight on to rail.
The nation's needs therefore dictate that we must preserve our national rail network, but achieve considerably higher levels of investment than we have had in the past. The privatisation of rail is producing the opposite. It has caused a slump in investment, and thus we have the disgraceful deterioration of the west coast main line, which is close to my heart because it takes me between London and Birmingham. That line serves a major corridor in the country and it is deteriorating greatly.
Investment in rolling stock has slumped, which means, tragically, that the Asea Brown Boveri carriage works in York will close. That will make hundreds of skilled workers redundant, and there will be further redundancies at ABB in Derby. Jobs will be lost and Britain's manufacturing capacity will be reduced. One hundred trains, worth nearly £500,000, which have already been purchased, are lying idle because the new bureaucracy set up by the Government has not cleared them for use.Of course we agree that proper health and safety standards must apply, but it is madness that new trains cannot be used and that older, less safe trains remain in use. That is another example of the madness of the structures established by the Government.
"one third of elderly patients admitted to Stepping Hill Hospital in Stockport had reduced the heating in their homes because of fears about the extra costs created by the addition of VAT to gas and electricity bills."
3.49 pm
That this House notes with grave concern the very serious allegations of fraud against the management team which has been awarded the franchise to operate the London, Tilbury and Southend rail line; is concerned that this fraud was discovered by British Rail staff only days before the franchise was handed over and would not have been subject to British Rail audit thereafter; believes that this development reveals flaws in the franchising system and the effectiveness of the franchise director; calls on the Government to acknowledge that the process of rail privatisation is costing the taxpayer more for a lesser service, has led to a slump in investment, and is undermining through-ticketing and connections between services; and therefore calls on the Government to halt the process of rail privatisation which is driven by dogma rather than the transport needs of the nation.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |