Winter Cold-related Deaths
We move to the second short debate of the morning, which is a debate on motion S2M-1021, in the name of John Swinburne, on winter cold-related deaths and two amendments to the motion. I invite those members who wish to contribute to the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
I thank you again this morning, Presiding Officer. Many serious issues badly affect the people I represent, but I am most conscious of the growing number of senior citizens and vulnerable members of our society who die each year from cold-related illnesses. Every winter, thousands of early deaths and extra hospital admissions occur because older people cannot afford to heat their homes adequately.
During the winter of 2002-03, the number of deaths that were caused by cold-related illnesses rose by 700 to 2,510 and in the years from 1997 to 2002 Scotland registered 16,600 excess deaths of people over 65 in the winter months of December to March. The death toll is comparable to that in 10 major air disasters, yet there has been no comparable response from the Government. Is not it disgraceful that pensioners are more likely to die of cold in Scotland than they are in Finland, Canada, Norway and even Siberia, where temperatures can plunge to -32°C?
I recognise that Mr Swinburne is trying to imply that pensioners in Scotland are more likely to die because of the cold, but he must accept that there are more complex reasons for the figures. If we consider the mortality figures, we see that the figures in Scotland are very similar to those of Italy, Spain and Portugal, which are not particularly cold.
I believe that those figures are due to excessive wine drinking in those hot countries, but I assure the minister that the cold kills people in Scotland.
Recent research by Energy Action Scotland and the University of Strathclyde showed that excess winter deaths correlate to multiple deprivation. The researchers concluded that the majority of such deaths are premature and could be prevented if the elderly could be kept warm in their houses in the winter months. It would therefore be churlish not to acknowledge the excellent pledge that the Scottish Executive made in 2001, when it allocated £350 million to install central heating systems in an identified 141,000 houses in Scotland—I am sorry to present members with so many statistics, but facts are chiels that winna ding, as Rabbie said.
The central heating programme is an excellent scheme on paper, and would be excellent in reality if it were fully implemented. However, since the launch of the initiative, it has been difficult to determine the numbers, costs and completion dates of installations. In a recent reply to a written question that I asked, the Deputy Minister for Communities indicated that only 39,520 households had had central heating systems installed.
From what I can glean, some £108 million has been spent to date on the programme. Completion dates for installation are reminiscent of those for the Holyrood building project, as dates range from 2004 to perhaps as far ahead as 2007. That means that, by 2004, heating systems will have been installed in 28 per cent of the houses that were originally identified, at a cost that will represent 38 per cent of the original budget. I am aware that some applicants for central heating systems do not qualify under the programme, but I cannot believe that 72 per cent of the houses that were originally identified are ineligible. In December, Communities Scotland stated that the Scottish Executive had lowered its targets. I cannot accept the Executive's stance, given that there was an excessive number of winter deaths last year and that that trend is likely to continue.
I receive letters constantly from senior citizens throughout Scotland whose applications for central heating have been turned down on the ground that the authorities believe that their homes are already adequately heated. The Executive might think that one open fire—or gas or electric fire—and a 42-year-old electric storage heater represent an adequate heating system, but I do not and nor do the pensioners who are forced to live in the one room in their home that has any source of heat.
Energy Action Scotland and Age Concern Scotland have stated that the central heating programme should be extended to target frail elderly people in harder-to-reach households. I think that the Executive has acknowledged that and is doing something about it and I am delighted to hear that. Energy Action Scotland and Age Concern Scotland have also called for the extension of the grants programme for people in the private sector who have partial central heating. I support those calls for an immediate extension to the programme. It is imperative that the Executive tell members clearly and precisely the number of households in which free central heating systems will be installed, above the 39,520 that have already been identified. It is important that the central heating initiative continue and be expanded in order to prevent unnecessary deaths.
Winter fuel payments must be better promoted and the Executive's fuel poverty forum should intensify its efforts to ensure that the main energy companies use the priority service register to target people who are fuel poor. Fuel poverty can be eradicated by more efficient insulation and heating systems.
Energy costs are another factor. Despite the fact that Scotland is 2°C colder than England, our death rate from hypothermia is three times that of England. The report into comparative energy costs by the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets showed that household costs are approximately £22 per year higher in Scotland. There were 458 disconnections in the first half of 2003, compared with 218 in the whole of 2002. For many people, disconnecting their energy supply is like shutting down their life-support system. I am seriously concerned that the problem will be exacerbated as energy prices continue to rise, and that there will be more disconnections as pensioners increasingly struggle to pay their fuel bills. Pre-payment meters undo all the good of Scottish Power's moratorium on disconnecting power to pensioners between October and March, because if a pensioner cannot afford a pre-payment electricity card, their supply is automatically cut off. That needs urgent attention.
I ask members to examine their consciences and to help my party to promote an extension of the central heating programme, which is an exceptionally good and worthwhile initiative.
I move,
That the Parliament notes with extreme concern recent figures that show that there were 2,510 deaths from cold-related illnesses during the winter of 2002-03, the majority of those being elderly people, an increase of nearly 700; condemns such statistics as reprehensible in Scotland in the 21st century, and, while welcoming the Scottish Executive's free central heating programme, recognises that the delivery of such programmes must be improved and extended to reach all senior citizens in need as soon as possible.
I move amendment S2M-1021.2, to leave out from "with extreme concern" to end and insert:
"the recent figures on winter cold-related deaths; recognises the decrease by half in the number of fuel-poor households in Scotland; welcomes the Scottish Executive's extension of the central heating programme to upgrade or replace partial or inefficient central heating systems for the over-80s in the private sector, and reaffirms the commitment to eradicate fuel poverty as far as reasonably practicable by 2016 thereby combating the threat of winter cold-related deaths."
I thank John Swinburne for bringing this important debate to the Parliament. The subject is exceptionally close to my heart; I think that I have spoken in every debate on fuel poverty in the Parliament since 1999. On behalf of the Scottish National Party, I also thank Margaret Ewing for the work that she has done over three decades, both in this Parliament and at Westminster, to ensure that fuel poverty is on the political agenda.
Excess winter deaths are calculated by comparing overall mortality statistics in the period from December to March with average death rates in the previous and subsequent four-month periods. The figures for excess winter deaths in Scotland are a disgrace to a civilised country. Every winter, what can best be described as a cull of elderly people takes place. It is important to remember that we are not talking about statistics; we are talking about people. Of course, the death certificates do not say, "Died of hypothermia" or "Died of cold", but that is why those people have died. Stirling Howieson, of the University of Strathclyde, says:
"These additional winter deaths are mainly in the elderly population and about 90 per cent are registered under heart, stroke and respiratory diseases, all of which are known to be exacerbated by cold living conditions. These deaths are essentially preventable if the elderly live in warm, dry homes."
That is the challenge for all of us. When we talk about excess winter deaths, it is important to remember that warm, dry homes will prevent those deaths.
As John Swinburne rightly said, between 1997 and 2002, Scotland registered 16,600 excess winter deaths among the over-65s in the period from December to March. However, we do not need research to tell us that; we just need to read the columns upon columns of death notices in our local newspapers in winter.
Why do people die of cold in winter in fuel-rich Scotland? We do not have particularly harsh winters; Sweden, Germany, Finland and even Siberia have harsher winters but fewer excess winter deaths than Scotland. All those countries, however, have higher standards of housing and a better quality of life.
I am grateful to Energy Action Scotland for its continuing work on fuel poverty. Fuel poverty is age related. Some 31 per cent of people over 75 are officially fuel poor, compared with only 5 per cent of people who are aged between 25 and 39. That is why today's debate is so important. The Government claims—and the minister claimed earlier—that the causes of excess winter deaths are complex and uncertain. However, there is consensus that poor heating and insulation and low income are the major factors.
The amount of money that it takes to heat a house varies considerably in different parts of the United Kingdom. It costs 41 per cent more to heat a house in Aberdeen, and 28 per cent more in Edinburgh, than it does in Bristol, yet the pension is the same wherever people live in the United Kingdom. I acknowledge that the Executive has made strides forward with the central heating programme, but that is only one part of the equation in tackling fuel poverty.
In a recent debate, the Executive claimed that the number of people in fuel poverty had decreased; that claim is replicated in the Executive's amendment today. During that debate in December, I pointed out that the central heating programme was only one aspect and that we had to take into account household income and fuel prices. Within a week, fuel prices in Scotland went up: Scottish Gas put up gas prices by 5.9 per cent. I asked the Executive in a written question what impact that 5.9 per cent increase would have on the number of people in fuel poverty. The answer began:
"The information requested could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost."—[Official Report, Written Answers, 13 January 2004; S2W-4886.]
I acknowledge that the Executive has made strides forward, but let us not pretend that the central heating programme is a panacea. We can eradicate fuel poverty but we have to be able to support income and pension levels. Excess winter deaths are caused by poverty. We need to tackle poverty, and this Parliament needs the power to do so.
I move amendment S2M-1021.1, to insert at end:
"and that fuel poverty in Scotland will not be eradicated until the Parliament has the full range of powers, including control over the pension and benefit system."
I congratulate John Swinburne on bringing these debates to the chamber this morning. Whether we like it or not, our population is aging; we must show respect to those who, without necessarily seeing much gain for themselves, have made life for us as easy as it has been.
One thing that jumps out from the statistics is that the incidence of winter deaths is rising faster than the increase in the age of the population. We have to consider the factors that have caused that. They fall into four main categories—heating, nutrition, health and wealth. Dealing with a combination of all four of those factors may help to solve the problem.
The Eaga Partnership's website states clearly that the central heating programme contains no provisions for the upgrading of existing inefficient systems. In our surgeries, we have all heard people saying, "The radiators are there but the boiler's inefficient. I'm told it's only got 20 per cent efficiency but I can't get a new one." In her amendment, the minister talks about upgrading systems "for the over-80s". In general, would it not be simpler to use heating systems that are already in place, because it would cost less to upgrade existing systems that are not working or are inefficient? Upgrading such systems might encourage people to use them.
When my mother was quite elderly and getting close to her death, we put her into a new house and I put in central heating for her. She wanted to turn it all off because of an instinctive desire not to waste money or heat. I had to get an engineer to put pins in all the thermostats so that there was a minimum temperature in the different rooms. Bless her—she never caught on to that. We knew then that she would at least get heat.
The biggest contributor to affordable fuel was the privatisation by the Conservative Government of the utilities. Reports by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and by UK Energy point out that privatisation reduced domestic energy costs in real terms by 18 to 20 per cent for electricity and about 16 per cent for gas. Power became more affordable. The next stage will be to get people to be more fuel efficient in their homes.
The Labour-Liberal Government in Scotland had a target in 1999 to eliminate fuel poverty by 2007. The Government has now been more realistic and has moved that target to 2016. I am not castigating the minister for that change, which simply reflects reality. However, we now have to say that that is the final cut-off date. We must have no more extensions, because we can all work towards the 2016 target.
The Conservatives had a home energy efficiency scheme that has rolled on into the warm deal. I congratulate the Labour Party on taking up where we left off in 1997. That has to be welcomed.
I turn now to health issues. Bedblocking is a huge problem and care homes are underfunded, so some people have nowhere to go and have to stay in their own homes. The NHS Quality Improvement Scotland report in February 2004 says that many people in hospital should not be there and that less than a quarter of trusts are achieving admission within two hours of someone being seen at an accident and emergency department. We have to consider such points.
We need to offer regular, pre-winter health checks to elderly people, to ensure that their health is properly assessed before winter starts. People at risk need to have regular checks, whether by means of phone calls or by means of people knocking on their doors. We must encourage good neighbourhood schemes to support people and keep a watchful eye on them. Following on from what Margo MacDonald said this morning, I believe that community facilities and luncheon clubs—and the transport that goes with them—help to keep people alert and awake.
We have not mentioned carers at all this morning. I hope that the minister will say how we can help them to look after the elderly.
This is one issue on which the Executive at least has a pass mark. As always, the report could say, "Could do better," but, in the previous session of Parliament and in this one, the Executive has genuinely tried to address the problem of cold affecting old people.
The coldest that I have ever been was when I was a wee boy, in the very severe winter of about 1940. At school, we were sent for a brisk walk in the first period every day so that we got mildly warm, the school had time to warm up a wee bit and, in particular, the ink in the old-fashioned inkwells had time to unfreeze. I have not been so cold since, but cold is a serious problem for many elderly people and we have to address it.
Three issues arise. First, there is a good insulation programme for houses to prevent loss of heat, but more effort could be put into it. In Scotland, we have a great many well-built old houses but, unfortunately, they were built in the days before central heating and many of them still do not have proper heating systems or insulation. Our ancestors put up with draughts much more than we are able to.
Secondly, after the second world war, we built many houses that, to be quite honest, are rubbish. We are still dealing with the resultant problems. In respect of insulation, our houses are much worse built than are Scandinavian houses, for example. More effort has to go into our work on insulation and central heating. As others have said, we have to get systems delivered locally. Bureaucracy must not get in the way. We have to improve existing central heating systems as well as putting in entirely new ones. The minister and her predecessors can take credit for doing quite a lot, but more could still be done.
The third issue is income and the cost of fuel. Some issues are not within the control of this Parliament but we could still address them better. There would be no point in giving every household in Scotland a motor car when half those households could not afford the petrol to run it. We have to consider people's income as well as providing a central heating system or other method of heating.
In the earlier debate this morning, pensioners' income, or lack of it, was discussed. Most such matters are reserved to Westminster. However, we could consider how we can help those who have received the benefit of central heating. We could perhaps subsidise their fuel payments. Intelligent government must be able to find some way round things, to crack the system and thus ensure that more old people benefit from the things that we have done for them or that they have done for themselves. People should be able to afford decent heating, because that is an integral part of life. The older we get, the more we need it. I commend the Executive for what it has done so far, but there are issues on which we can improve.
I am afraid that there is no time to call anyone in the open debate, so I call the minister to respond.
Excess winter deaths are a serious issue and I welcome the opportunity to discuss the matter again following our debate in November. The issue is not simply about living in a cold climate or in a poor house. We are doing our utmost to tackle the causes of cold-related and increasing death rates. Pensioners' incomes are being increased and we are improving people's homes. We know that we are having some success. Fuel poverty figures have plummeted since 1996—they are down by more than a half—and we are meeting all our warm deal insulation programme and central heating programme targets.
Will the minister not acknowledge, even at this stage, that fuel poverty relates to three things: house conditions, household income and fuel prices? Fuel prices were held steady for a long time and that helped in no small way to bring down fuel poverty levels. A 5.9 per cent increase in fuel bills inevitably means that the number of people in fuel poverty will increase. The central heating programme has had an impact, but not the kind of impact that the minister is trying to suggest that it has had.
The programme has indeed had an impact. I will come to the issues that Tricia Marwick raises, but, as she has intervened, I should refer to what she said earlier about a lack of information on fuel price rises. We did not have the figures when she wrote, but in our response in the fuel poverty debate later in the session we will try to bring together figures that will show the impact of fuel price increases.
We are not complacent about the impact that the central heating programme has had. We know that we must remain vigilant and that, although some of the easy-to-treat homes have been treated, we will be challenged by the expensive-to-treat homes. We know that some people need a higher income or cheaper fuel. We encourage people to find out whether they are getting all the benefits and tax credits to which they are entitled and we encourage them to switch fuels or suppliers if they can get a cheaper deal.
The central heating and warm deal programmes are making significant inroads to eradicate fuel poverty. Cold and damp housing can have serious health implications. The benefits of those programmes ensure that the most vulnerable households have warmer homes and lower fuel bills.
The central heating programme started in 2001. Since then, we have installed 31,730 central heating systems. Homes now benefit from central heating where none previously existed. Our warm deal programme also provides the most vulnerable with a package of measures to help to insulate their homes. In the current year, we expect approximately 30,000 homes to benefit from those insulation measures. So far, we have insulated more than 180,000 homes.
In the fuel poverty debate in November, the Minister for Communities said that she was concerned about the high number of disconnections. Since then, she has raised that issue with the energy companies. Last week, I was pleased to see that the disconnection figures for the last quarter of 2003 were significantly down on the figures for the previous quarters. I agree with John Swinburne that we must encourage pensioners to register on the priority services register for added protection.
The cumulative effect of our measures and actions is that a substantial number of people now benefit from warm and comfortable homes. A sign of a civilised society is that it looks after its elderly citizens and our achievements illustrate our commitment to, and the importance that we place on, the health and welfare of our senior citizens.
Much of what has been said has been illuminating. I do not in any way disparage the Executive's excellent central heating scheme, which is absolutely marvellous. We know many recipients of the scheme who are enjoying its benefits. However, the scheme does not quite go far enough or fast enough. Tricia Marwick mentioned rises in fuel prices. I know people who have had central heating systems installed in their homes but who cannot afford to turn them on. That is wrong. There is bound to be some way in which we can enhance their living standards by considering that problem.
David Davidson's contribution to the debate was excellent. He mentioned the over-80s. The chancellor is looking after them, you know. Only last week, I received a form that told me about my pension. A little footnote said that, when I reach 80, my pension will automatically be increased by 25p. The increase does not need to be applied for and there is no means testing. I do not know what I will do with that 25p. If I give it to any of my grandchildren as pocket money, they will laugh at me. Perhaps I will save it up and buy a stamp or something like that with it, once the money accumulates.
Donald Gorrie took me back down memory lane. I, too, have been in school when the inkwells have frozen up. We would be taken outside for a class ramble until the inkwells thawed out and a fire heated up the room.
Mary Mulligan made a genuine defence of the excellent central heating programme. The fact that the figures are rising is interesting. I know that she will take on board my point that we are not doing enough fast enough. Unfortunately, everything is not in the Executive's control. Some councils are doing excellent work, but other councils are dragging their feet. I mentioned earlier a gentleman who wrote to me saying that he had three electric storage heaters that were manufactured in 1965. If he put them on, he would go bankrupt trying to keep them going—the meter would start going round.
Does the member accept that all local authorities will have completed the installation of central heating systems this year? If anybody in their stock does not have a system, that will be because they are not aware of the programme. We need to advertise the service to ensure that people come forward. The issue is not that people are being ignored, but that people do not know about the systems.
I say to the minister that the figures do not add up. We can locate only 39,520 homes that have had central heating installed in them, but 141,000 homes were originally identified as requiring central heating installation. The figures do not equate. There is a huge disparity.
That is because the figure that we used initially was from the 1996 house condition survey. During the period from 1996 to 2001, when the programme started, a large number of local authorities installed central heating. That is why the figure came down.
That is one explanation that we can look into further. However, it does not solve the problem that 141,000 houses required upgrading and only around 40,000 have been upgraded. There is something amiss.
The debate has been interesting. It is good that, for once, my generation is in the forefront. We are a quarter of the electorate. If a quarter of the electorate are ignored, they can ignore people when it comes to putting a big cross on the ballot paper.