Water Supplies (Lead Pipes)
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S1M-3774, in the name of Robert Brown, on lead pipes in drinking water supplies. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. Members who wish to contribute to the debate should press their request-to-speak buttons now.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes the continued presence of lead pipes in both parts of the Scottish Water infrastructure and many domestic and business water supplies; notes the serious health hazards associated with lead in drinking water; notes the implications for the treatment of water supplies by Scottish Water and the unreliable nature of information as to the location of such lead pipes, and considers that an urgent review of the issue is needed and that action should be taken to ensure the removal of all lead pipes from drinking water supplies in Scotland as soon as possible and, specifically, to tackle the removal of lead pipes in Glasgow's older tenement areas.
For a moment, I thought from the number of people in the gallery that a large number of people were interested in the debate, but that has turned out not to be the case.
Nevertheless, lead in water supplies is a serious problem, particularly for babies and children. It is recognised as a priority for public health action at national and international level and is a child development issue, as lead stays in the tissues for long periods and has long-term effects.
In the United States, a recent study found that around 4.4 per cent of children between one and five years old have blood lead levels above 10 micrograms per decilitre—members should pay attention to the figures that I mention. Elevated levels of lead were found significantly more often in black children, children from low-income families and children who live in urban areas. Lead toxicity was found to be associated with decreases in intelligence quotient test scores—a two to three-point decrease in the test score for every increase of 10 micrograms per decilitre in the blood lead level.
Elevated blood lead levels are also associated with neurodevelopmental abnormalities, including attention deficit disorder, behavioural disturbances, learning disabilities and deficits in fine and gross motor development. Toxic effects on the central nervous system and resultant long-term neurobehavioural and cognitive deficits occur even with mildly elevated blood lead levels.
The European Union's drinking water directive 98/83/EC requires compliance with tighter standards by 25 December 2003. A maximum level in water of 25 micrograms per litre will replace the current level of 50 micrograms per litre. The standard will be further reduced to 10 micrograms per litre by the end of 2013.
In Scotland, a report from the Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health, which was commissioned by the Scottish Executive, is due within the next few weeks. However, an earlier SCIEH report in November 2000 found that 15 per cent of new homes in Scotland had excess lead levels—in fact, that figure rose to 30 per cent in the houses most recently built at that time.
Like most people, I was broadly aware that lead in water is bad and that lead pipes in domestic water supplies were gradually being removed, but I confess that I had not considered or pursued the issue further, but a few weeks ago I was invited to a meeting—organised by Hillhead community council—with a representative of Scottish Water, at which people from the council and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency were present. Pauline McNeill and Sandra White were also there.
What I heard alarmed me greatly. Essentially, Scottish Water does not know where there are still lead pipes in its infrastructure, but it thinks that there are probably quite a few connections into the water supply in which its bit, as well as the house owner's bit, are still made of lead. Just as bad is the unknown extent to which non-lead pipes have been joined by lead solder.
I understand that the use of lead solder in domestic water pipes is illegal under 1986 byelaws, but that it is cheaper and easier for plumbers to use. To its credit, the Scottish Executive tried to tackle the problem after the November 2000 report, but the problem is by its nature extremely difficult to stop and remedy. To complicate matters more, some people have lead-lined storage containers in their attics.
The lead solder problem showed up specifically in new houses but, as the American study implies, it is probable that the worst problems arise in old tenements such as those that predominate in many parts of Glasgow, not least in areas such as Hillhead. Scottish Water confirmed that it has discovered highish levels of lead content in water in areas such as Hillhead, but since it does not know the extent or location of lead pipes or lead soldered pipes it has to flush phosphate through some parts of the supply to control the extent to which there is lead in the system.
It will probably not be possible to attain the 2013 standard by using phosphate treatment; it will be necessary to go further and look for different methods of tackling the problem. It seems to me that this serious issue has to be tackled comprehensively. It is necessary to stop plumbers using lead solder by whatever means are necessary. We must bear in mind that lead solder is commonly used—because it is cheaper—for central heating systems. It is also necessary to identify areas where there is a concentrated problem, such as the old tenements, to establish what technical issues there are in replacing the pipes and to declare some areas free of lead if possible. Above all, we need to target the specific issue of lead in drinking water in tenements. There is a heavier concentration of people in tenements and there are more likely to be relics of old pipes either in the supply from the street or, more likely, in the main supply pipe going up and down the building and in the individual domestic supplies.
When renovation has been done to the building, it may have been difficult to get at the main supply for the tenement, which might therefore have been left where it was. I am bound to say that the information that I got put me off tap water altogether and I would be unenthusiastic about using tap water in old offices where the same problems apply—perhaps to an even greater extent.
I understand that in West Lothian there is a joint scheme between Scottish Water and West Lothian Council to replace tenement pipes. In Clermiston in Edinburgh, a pilot scheme that links replacement of Scottish Water's pipework with encouragement to owners to replace their pipes at the same time has had modest success and has thrown up lots of specific problems.
This problem has been with us for many years; it is high time that we dealt with it properly. The matter is bedevilled by technical problems, illegal activities by plumbers and inadequately completed modernisations. We pride ourselves on the purity of water in Scotland; we certainly have plenty of it. The reality is that a significant part of the supply to our homes—in new houses and more insidiously in old houses—is contaminated by lead. I hope that the minister is able to give us some degree of comfort on those issues in his reply.
I will make a brief speech. I was not very aware of the issue, so I tried to make myself a bit more aware of it before tonight. I found an article on the BBC news website about the situation back in 2000 when the "Frontline Scotland" programme investigated the problems of lead in new developments. I must admit that I was not highly aware of that aspect of the situation. I am shocked by the figures. Up to 30 per cent of new homes built in 2000 had drinking water contaminated by lead. That was caused, as Robert Brown said, by the illegal use of lead solder to join copper pipes. It is a concerning situation, particularly given that even very low levels of contamination by lead can have an impact on young children. It is also very concerning for pregnant women.
Some developers and builders must know what the plumbers on their sites are doing—I find it hard to believe that plumbers are doing such things off their own back. Such people have a blatant disregard for human health and the law. We must find out what more can be done.
The BBC article contains a comment from Dr Pauline Upton, who is a consultant in public health. She said that although adults are unlikely to be affected by lead poisoning unless the levels are very high,
"Children and babies are particularly vulnerable to the effects of lead poisoning, so it is important that parents follow … advice."
What advice are parents and pregnant women getting about lead in water? It is important that such people get advice, as that could reduce the risk of their being affected by lead.
We need answers to our questions. Robert Brown mentioned what Scottish Water is doing to discover problems in its supply—that issue must be addressed. I appreciate that the Scottish Executive tried to tackle the problem after the Scottish new homes lead survey in 2000. We are awaiting another report and it will be interesting to see the figures, but we must know now what further measures will be taken to address the problem.
In East Ayrshire, 46 per cent of the houses that were sampled failed: in Moray, 66 per cent failed. The levels in other areas varied and some were fairly low. People who live in those areas and who have young children or who are pregnant will be concerned about the issue of lead in water. We must reassure the public and I hope that the minister's response will do that.
My microphone appears to be down, so if I speak unduly loudly that is the reason.
You are coming through loud and clear, Presiding Officer.
I congratulate Robert Brown on securing this debate on lead pipes and the danger of lead in Scotland's water supplies. We are all aware that lead in its many forms poses a threat to us all and particularly to children. Lead is present not just in water pipes, but in paint, exhaust fumes, the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat and the soil in our garden. As Robert Brown said, medical evidence has long shown the need to eliminate or at least keep to a low level our lead intake. The debate is helpful because it highlights the problem once again.
The Conservative party welcomes all moves to reduce lead in the environment, including the Executive's commitment to reduce lead levels in drinking water from 50 to 25 micrograms per litre by the end of the year. We also welcome the proposed further reduction of lead in our water to 10 micrograms per litre by 2013. We will monitor the Executive's promise to deliver those levels.
As Robert Brown and Shona Robison mentioned, a particular concern is the excessive level of lead contamination found in the water supplies of new houses as a result of the use of lead solder. Given that about 20,000 new homes are built in Scotland each year, the illegal use of lead solder is a real problem. The Scottish new homes lead survey of 2000 found that, at a conservative estimate, 15 per cent of new homes might have unacceptably high lead levels. We welcome the proposed measures and those that have been introduced to make householders aware of that danger, which is a result of bad practice.
Given the well-documented dangers of lead in water supplies, it is outrageous that 3,000 new-build homes should be affected each year. If we consider the worst-case scenario, as we must, it is possible to conclude from the study that, of the 240,000 new homes that have been built since 1987, more than 75,000 might have lead solder connections in the water supply piping. That puts families and children at risk, particularly with larger new-build houses and flats of the type that are preferred by families with young children. The practice of using lead solder must be stamped out.
We therefore welcome Scottish Water's convening of a lead strategy group. We welcome the recognition of the need to monitor a problem that most people thought had been resolved a decade ago. We acknowledge the discretionary grants that are available from local authorities for the replacement of lead piping and feel that the public should be made more aware that those grants exist.
We must try to make progress. The Executive should perhaps consider issuing guidance that local authorities should not issue completion certificates for new buildings or alterations until the levels of lead in the water have been checked. If a completion certificate were not given when a new house was found to have higher than permitted levels of lead in its water, the practice of using lead solder would stop overnight.
We have a surprising window of opportunity to deliver such a move. I intend to lodge an amendment at stage 3 of the Building (Scotland) Bill, which is to be debated next week. I hope that the Executive will consider that amendment carefully. I intend it to cut out the use of illegal lead solder in house building in Scotland.
We welcome the debate and look forward to the minister's response to it.
I will first say how shocked and horrified I was that my esteemed colleague Shona Robison did not have the courtesy to welcome the debate and congratulate Robert Brown on securing it. I therefore do so on behalf of both of us.
Lead is alleged to have been one of the main causes of the fall of the Roman empire. It was alleged that Caligula often ate from lead dishes rather than gold, and that that helped to imbalance his mind and led to the fall of that lofty institution.
Lead is a naturally occurring metal that is found in air, food, soil and water. One of the problems that we have, particularly in the west of Scotland, is that soft water is more likely to pick up lead than is hard water, so lead is more likely to be a problem in some parts of Scotland than it is in others. As has been mentioned, lead causes behavioural problems and can restrict the mental development of young children because it builds up in the body.
Although one must commend successive United Kingdom Governments for taking action to reduce lead in petrol, paintwork and pipes, lead—as well as lead solder—in pipes remains a problem in several parts of Scotland. Houses that were built before 1970 have more of a problem than those that have been built since then, but when one considers the number of old houses and the problems that still exist, it is hardly surprising that only two years ago the City of Edinburgh Council felt the need to send a leaflet to some properties to advise people about the risks from lead in their households.
It is important that people are able to identify a lead pipe, but not everyone can. What does lead look like? If it is unpainted, it is a dull grey soft metal that is shiny and silver underneath if scraped. It is therefore quite different from the much darker iron, or the copper that we see in our low-denomination coins. It should be easy to find.
If people have lead pipes in their water systems, one would advise them to try to have it removed, either with the assistance of grants or through their own resources. Until that happens, if such people are going to use tap water, they should let it run for a couple of minutes from the cold tap before they use it. Even then, they should still boil it to ensure that the lead is no longer present. There is also a lead test adviser who can advise people and whose number is 0131 669 8770.
In 2000, "Frontline Scotland" covered the issue. The investigation highlighted the case of the Fyfe family from Uddingston, whose son took ill through lead poisoning. Their home was brand new, but the problem was traced to lead solder on the pipes. "Frontline Scotland" carried out a random survey of 95 new homes and found that 10 were affected by lead solder.
The issue is clearly of considerable concern. I was delighted to hear of the measures that John Scott intends to take in the form of an amendment to the Building (Scotland) Bill. I assure him that he will have the Scottish National Party's support for that amendment—I imagine that he will have the support of all parties.
Scottish Water is doing something about the problem. As has been mentioned, it has formed a lead strategy working group, which hopes by 31 December this year to reduce the amount of lead in Scottish water to 25 micrograms per litre, which is half the maximum level that has been set by the European Union. Although a target of 10 micrograms per litre by 2013 is a much more significant and more ambitious target, we can at least make some progress in the short term.
I congratulate Robert Brown on securing the debate and on his speech, which left no one else with very much to say. John Scott, Kenny Gibson and Shona Robison have all made helpful suggestions.
I will cap Kenny Gibson's useless historical information by adding that everyone on a British expedition to find the north-west passage to the north of Canada died mysteriously; subsequent research suggested that they died because of lead solder on the food tins—tins at that time being a novelty.
I wish to concentrate on one of the points that John Scott made in relation to how to enforce people's non-use of lead solder. I pursued, I think in 1999 or early in 2000, the issue of lead solder in Uddingston in my constituency. The water authority said that although it tried to inspect such matters, it had very few inspectors. The council said that the problem was not really its affair, so nobody really did anything. The only answer is to bring the matter into building controls. If John Scott has a specific suggestion, that is to be welcomed. Building control is already staffed, and people already inspect buildings before giving out certificates. It would be a small extension of that work to check for lead solder. The ordinary citizen has no idea whether lead solder has been used or not.
I am not a skilled plumber but—as I understand it—not only is lead solder cheaper than the alternative, it is much easier to work with. There is an incentive to plumbers to use lead solder because it eases their task and they can get through their work quicker. There is also an incentive for employers to connive with plumbers in using it, because they will get through more work and will be able to contract for a smaller figure. There is considerable incentive to cheat, and we need a really good inspection system in order to prevent people from cheating. I hope that the minister can pursue the issue with his customary energy.
I, too, congratulate Robert Brown on securing the debate. Two out of three SNP members have now congratulated Robert, so that is not bad.
There are two aspects to the debate. First, there is the matter of lead piping in domestic water systems; secondly, there is the problem with lead solder, particularly in new houses. I will concentrate on domestic water supplies and on older houses. I have been concerned about the subject for several years, because the effect of lead on the development of children has been known about for decades—it is not new.
Towards the end of last year, I lodged a number of questions asking the Executive how many houses in Scotland had water supplies that contain lead piping, but the Executive could not tell me. Furthermore, there are no plans to collect that information centrally, which is not good enough.
There is a grant system for domestic householders to replace lead piping. The problem is that the grants that are available to local authorities, or rather those that are available to householders, are extremely limited. The number of grants that may be granted each year is constrained by the amount of money that is available. It will take many years to make progress on eliminating the existing problem in old houses and to get rid of lead piping in domestic water supplies. The Executive needs to address that as a matter of urgency.
I turn now to the issue of the lead solder that is used in new homes. I, too, welcome John Scott's announcement that at stage 3 of the Building (Scotland) Bill he intends to lodge an amendment to address that matter. The SNP will consider that amendment and, if it is as John Scott describes, SNP members will support it. The practice of using lead solder is clearly detrimental to health, and I wonder whether it is a criminal matter. If so, why have there been no prosecutions for using lead solder? As well as ensuring that completion certificates are right, so that building warrants are not issued if lead solder has been used, we must use the force of law—if necessary—to ensure that contractors who do not comply voluntarily are aware that their actions will be dealt with.
I join two thirds of the SNP members who have spoken, the Conservatives and Robert Brown's Liberal colleagues in congratulating the member on securing the debate.
I confirm that Kenny Gibson's historical reference was correct. I am not sure about the case of Caligula, but I know that lead poisoning was a problem in ancient Rome, in large measure because of the sophisticated system of plumbing, which incorporated—guess what—lead pipes. I believe that the ancient Romans also lined their wine urns with lead, which caused problems for wine drinkers.
Since Roman times, lead has been well known as a toxin. As Robert Brown pointed out, the Scottish drinking water quality regulations recognise that by reducing the standard for lead in drinking water from 50 micrograms per litre to 25 micrograms per litre at the end of this year. That tighter standard, which applies at the customer's tap, is in line with European Union directives and World Health Organisation guidelines. Of course, the tightening of the standard for lead in drinking water reflects the concern that all members have expressed about the fact that the human body absorbs lead from drinking water easily and that children in particular may be vulnerable to the neurotoxic effects of lead.
Understandably, we take those concerns seriously and have put in place a number of measures to protect public health. Before outlining those measures, I remind members that the amount of lead in water as it leaves water treatment works is insignificant. Donald Gorrie, among others, made that point. There are no lead water mains in Scotland. The lead problem is property specific and is generally—although not exclusively—confined to properties constructed before the 1970s.
In preparation for meeting the new standard, the Executive asked the three former water authorities to identify areas where there was a significant risk that tap samples would fail to meet the new standards. That involved the water authorities carrying out a survey in 2001-02, during which 20,000 water samples were taken. Failure to meet the standard was generally the result of lead communication pipes, which are owned by the water authorities and run from the mains in the street up to the property boundaries; lead supply pipes, which belong to the property owner and connect the communication pipe to internal plumbing; and internal lead plumbing.
Because the majority of the pipework that is likely to cause a breach of the new standard is not owned by Scottish Water, which has taken over the responsibilities of the water authorities, the options open to Scottish Water to ensure compliance with the new standard are limited. The principal method of achieving compliance is therefore to treat the water, as has been mentioned. That approach has been adopted throughout the United Kingdom.
By treating the water, it is possible to limit the amount of lead that dissolves from lead pipework into the water supply. Water treatment to prevent lead dissolving from pipes has been routine in parts of Scotland for many years. The Glasgow water supply, to which Kenny Gibson referred, has been treated since 1989 because of problems with lead pipes, especially in the city's older tenement properties, with which both he and I are very familiar.
Although the issue is important, it is not new, as everyone has said. Despite the fact that the problem has been known about for some time, I acknowledge that the exact number of properties that are connected to the water main with lead plumbing—Tricia Marwick referred to the issue—is not known. The 1994 drinking water quality report estimated that more than 0.5 million Scottish homes still had lead pipes.
The survey carried out by Scottish Water in 2001-02, to which I referred, should provide a more up-to-date estimate of the number of properties with lead pipes. An analysis of that data is continuing and it will be published when it is available. The survey is designed—I think that this was Tricia Marwick's point—to identify which water supply areas require treatment. That is probably the crux of the matter, rather than how many individual properties have lead plumbing. Scottish Executive statisticians will analyse that data further to provide an estimate of the number of properties in Scotland that have lead pipes. With that data, we will go as far as we can towards providing the information that members seek.
Although I fully expect the latest survey to reveal that a significant number of properties in Scotland still have lead plumbing, it is important to remember that treatment is already in place in many of the worst-affected areas. The effectiveness of the treatment is backed up by the drinking water quality results for 2002, which show that only 45 of 2,800 regulatory samples taken from throughout Scotland failed to meet the tighter standards that we have introduced of 25 micrograms per litre.
I wonder whether the phosphate treatment disguises the problem to some extent, because I presume that, when the samples are taken, the lead levels are lower than they would be without the phosphate.
The purpose of the phosphate treatment is to reduce the incidence of lead in the supply, and it is effective in doing that. In samples that are taken from areas where water is treated, we would expect there to be a reduction below the new standard. The point that Robert Brown made about the levels after treatment—as opposed to with a programme of replacement, which I will come on to—is that, in the main, they would fail to meet the new standard that will be introduced in 2013 of 10 micrograms per litre. Treatment is effective to 0.6 per cent of the new standards that have been introduced, but to meet the higher standard that we expect to introduce in 2013 will require a programme of lead pipe replacement between now and then. That is what Robert Brown's motion gets at, and we want to make progress on that.
When a sample fails to meet the regulatory standard for lead, Scottish Water must advise the occupier of measures that they can take to reduce the risk from lead in their drinking water. That advice can range from running the tap before use to the replacement of the lead pipes. If the occupier is not the owner of the property, from the end of this year the new regulations require that Scottish Water must also inform the owner of the property. Also, when a failure occurs, Scottish Water examines its pipeworks to see whether the communication pipe is made of lead. If it is, Scottish Water will replace it.
In addition to replacing communication pipes associated with regulatory failures, Scottish Water replaces lead communication pipes as part of its water mains rehabilitation programme. The mains rehabilitation programme is a significant part of the £1.8 billion investment programme that was agreed with ministers in August 2001. In November 2000, health and environment ministers launched a public information initiative designed to alert the public to the risks of lead in drinking water, particularly for those who are most at risk, such as pregnant women and young children.
Members of the public who are concerned about the risks and who wish to replace their lead pipework might be eligible for a housing repair grant from their local authority. In 2001-02, nearly 1,400 grants were approved by local authorities for the replacement of lead plumbing. That represents something like 11 per cent of all grants.
Although the statutory tolerable standard for the condition of houses does not cover lead in drinking water, it has long been recognised that that is a significant problem. The issue is about having an adequate and wholesome water supply. That is why grants for up to 90 per cent of the cost of replacing lead pipes are available. The Executive will continue to acknowledge the concern by making available for such work a minimum grant of 50 per cent. Beyond the 50 per cent level, grants become subject to a test of resources.
If I heard the figures correctly, 1,400 grants were made to domestic householders last year. We estimate that half a million houses have lead piping. It is not necessary to be a rocket scientist or a mathematician to work out that it will take a long time to eradicate lead from the domestic water supply if we continue at the rate of 1,400 grants a year.
We give significant resources to local authorities. The interesting point is that a great deal can be achieved with only a small proportion of resources. Lead pipe replacement represents only 2 or 3 per cent of the grant expenditure to which the member referred, but it accounts for around 13 per cent of the number of building repair grants that are awarded nationally. Expenditure on lead pipe replacement could be increased exponentially by increasing the percentage of housing repair grants that are devoted to lead pipe replacement. The problem can be addressed within existing resources. A modest increase in resources will offer further help.
The housing improvement task force is reviewing the tolerable standard and might recommend including acceptable levels in drinking water. The Executive will consider all the task force's proposals and will consult on how best to implement them.
In the water quality regulations, the Executive has provided that when someone has taken the initiative by replacing their lead pipes, Scottish Water must replace its communication pipe if it is also made of lead. That significant provision ensures that consumers get the full benefit of their efforts and do not continue to be supplied with water through a length of lead pipe that they do not own. If they replace their internal plumbing, Scottish Water will replace the communication pipe.
The measures that the Executive has already put in place provide the general public with a high degree of protection from lead in drinking water supplies. We are not complacent. Public health is paramount in such circumstances. In spite of the high degree of compliance in 2002 with the standard that comes into force at the end of 2003, more water treatment works will be equipped to provide treatment that will prevent lead from dissolving from pipes.
John Scott knows that I am aware of the suggestion that the lead problem could be addressed through building regulations in the Building (Scotland) Bill. I give an assurance to John Scott and Robert Brown that we will assess whether action can be taken in that bill. If that is possible, we will certainly be prepared to lodge appropriate Executive amendments.
Meeting closed at 17:43.