Plenary, 15 Dec 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, December 15, 2005

Official Report 851KB pdf

---

Excess Winter Deaths (Greater Glasgow)

The next item of business is a member's business debate on motion S2M-3482, in the name of Paul Martin, on excess winter deaths in greater Glasgow. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes this year's Scottish excess winter death figures, which show that the NHS Greater Glasgow area has the largest number of excess winter deaths in Scotland; expresses great concern that the number of excess winter deaths in Glasgow among older people has increased from 410 to 460; supports the Scottish Executive's fuel poverty programmes; believes that the Executive should continue to commit to the programmes and its pledge to eradicate fuel poverty by 2017, and supports the work of the Scottish Gas Help the Aged Partnership and its call to the Executive for a holistic approach to address the problem of excess winter deaths, including looking at nutrition, regular exercise, flu jab uptake, appropriate clothing, maximising incomes, proper insulation and heating systems for homes, extending the gas main where it is economically viable and providing greater face-to-face support and practical help for older people.

First, I thank the 45 members from all parties who have supported the motion in my name. I also thank Help the Aged, and particularly Richard Meade of that organisation, for providing a helpful briefing and for campaigning so effectively on winter deaths of the elderly.

The statistics speak for themselves. More than 2,760 people in Scotland—2,550 of whom were elderly—died of winter-related illnesses in the past year. In the Greater Glasgow NHS Board area—which covers the Springburn constituency that I represent—there were 450 winter-related deaths, of which the majority were of elderly people. The tragedy that lies behind those statistics is that with the right strategy and effective action plans, those numbers could be drastically reduced.

I do not want to use my speech to applaud the Executive, the Parliament and the utility companies for the very good work that they have done so far; that would be an opportunity missed. The briefing document describes the good work that has been done. Instead, I will make the point that more has to be done to tackle the statistics. If all was right, the figures would not be at their current levels.

What action can we expect from our utility companies? Their collective profits come to £6.7 billion. I do not grudge any public limited company the opportunity to make its profits, but I want the utility companies to do more to target those who are most at risk. Direct payments should be made to those whom we can identify on a postcode basis as being most at risk. I welcome several of the initiatives that have been made by some of the utility companies, but I want there to be more direct targeting of subsidies to those who are in most danger because they live in fuel poverty.

For far too long, public limited companies have discriminated in favour of those who are economically active and who have the most disposable income. That is true of banks and many other PLCs. Here is an opportunity for our utility companies to set an example by discriminating in favour of those who are most at risk because they live in fuel poverty. I want those companies to lay out their plans for discriminating directly in favour of those who live in fuel poverty and I would welcome the minister's response to that possible initiative.

From various initiatives, we have seen that community action plans can make a difference, and I would like local communities to set out such plans. Consider the success of many organisations that are in regular contact with the elderly. For example, the alive and kicking project, which is based in the Red Road area of my constituency, provides a range of opportunities to target those who are most in need as a result of fuel poverty. The project provides benefits advice and ensures that people take up their council tax benefits. It also provides advice on healthy living; the Help the Aged briefing makes it very clear that such advice can reduce winter-related illnesses. The project puts on concert parties and members take trips to Spain, Ireland and many other parts of the world as part of the healthy living and active lifestyle that the project encourages for the elderly.

I commend another excellent project—the north of Glasgow good morning project—in which direct contact is made with those who are most vulnerable in the local community. We live in an age in which we have to deal with unwanted calls from call centres. In that project, the reverse happens: the workers make direct contact with the elderly. We should consider doing that in a more concentrated and sophisticated manner; I would like initiatives such as the good morning project to be rolled out to other parts of Scotland to ensure that those who are most at risk are contacted and that their needs are met.

We have missed an opportunity to take advantage of the advances in information technology throughout the world in recent years. Some time ago, I spoke to an 83-year-old constituent who advised me that she wanted me to contact her by e-mail. She was offended when I registered surprise that she had an e-mail address—she was very proud of being a silver surfer. That made me realise that IT could be a very effective way of getting information to the elderly and of communicating with them. Advances in IT could provide a more targeted approach to delivering health advice and information about activities in their communities to the elderly. I look forward to hearing the minister's response to that suggestion.

Sometimes in the chamber and in committee we hear calls for research to be done into a particular subject. I am not always happy with that approach, because it can be used as an excuse to introduce a stopgap and to defer the setting in place of action plans. However, I recognise that on this issue there is a need to clarify the challenges that we face. We must also recognise the contribution of all those who help the elderly—the unsung heroes such as home helps, concierge staff and the many other workers who are in contact with the elderly and who play a crucial role in tackling fuel poverty and ensuring that people are given effective advice. We should conduct research into the effective work that those people do in tackling the number of excess winter deaths.

It would be wrong not to applaud the good work that goes on. We should recognise that there are partnerships, but also that there is a need for a more holistic approach to them. We need to look at the statistics and at targeting those who are at greatest risk on a postcode, street-by-street basis. After all, many credit card companies target people on such a basis—let us use such methods to target those whom we believe to be most in need. I would like to see a more effective partnership between the utility companies, the Executive and everyone else who has a role to play. That would ensure that we could reduce the appalling statistics on deaths during the winter months.

I thank Paul Martin for securing the debate. I also thank Help the Aged for producing such excellent documents; I spoke at the organisation's annual general meeting just a few nights ago. I thank, too, Age Concern and all the many voluntary groups whose members give of their time and expertise to help our elder people throughout the year, but particularly during the winter months.

The debate is timely, given that the predictions are that we will have the worst winter for 40 years. That is very concerning, given the excess winter deaths that that would cause throughout Scotland and in Glasgow in particular. A study that was done by Energy Action Scotland and the University of Strathclyde found that most pensioners in Glasgow were at risk and that the over-65s in Glasgow were more at risk of dying in the winter months than over-65s anywhere else in Scotland. We must take that very seriously. I hope that the minister and others will look at that issue.

Like Paul Martin, I recognise the work that the Parliament is doing; we should be grateful for that work and welcome it. However, when one in 36 of Glasgow's over-65s dies every winter, it is obvious that not enough is being done. There are benefits to the work that the Parliament is doing, but there are also barriers.

Elderly people find it very difficult to access benefits, and I would like the minister and the Parliament to look at the forms that have to be filled in. Pensioners are very proud people and sometimes they do not want to access benefits. However, that is an argument for another day. Filling in forms is very difficult. I have difficulty when I am helping elderly people to fill in forms and I know that they find it difficult too. We must put more emphasis on providing advice on what people can claim and how they should fill in the forms.

I agree with what Paul Martin said about the utility companies. That relates not just to fuel poverty, but to the multiple deprivation that is creeping in. Despite what the First Minister said earlier, there is multiple deprivation and it accounts for the excess winter deaths in the Glasgow area. The Scottish index of multiple deprivation, which is published by the Scottish Executive, names Glasgow as the worst region in terms of multiple deprivation. We need a holistic, joined-up approach. We have to target the agencies that target the pensioners. Those agencies link health, housing and social issues. We should not consider fuel poverty and benefits in isolation.

I ask the Scottish Executive to examine "The Strategy for Older People in Wales" of the Welsh Assembly Government, which led to the establishment of a Cabinet sub-committee that considers older people's needs and experiences and what it is like to be an older person. The strategy, which highlights the issues that affect older people in Wales, is an excellent document and I ask the minister and the Executive to emulate it. The Welsh Cabinet sub-committee considers the issues in a co-ordinated way and takes a holistic approach. It considers not just present needs, but changing demography and the ever-changing needs of elderly people in Wales. The strategy forms an important part of the Welsh Assembly Government's plans.

We have heard that one of the huge post offices in Glasgow is to close down and we are looking at similar closures throughout Scotland, including in rural areas. One item that is included in the action plan in the Welsh strategy is:

"Develop Post Offices as community economic development centres."

Instead of being closed, post offices are being opened up so that people can access not just their pensions but community facilities. I ask the minister to look carefully at the Welsh strategy. She might not be able to commit herself today, but I ask her seriously to consider producing a similar strategy for older people in Scotland.

The Parliament should be grateful to Paul Martin for bringing this important issue to the chamber today and he is to be congratulated on providing a comprehensive motion. The basic concern in that motion is the fact that, at 460, the number of excess winter deaths in Glasgow is at an all-time high. Surely that must concern us all.

The joint survey by Energy Action Scotland and the University of Strathclyde to which Sandra White referred states that fewer elderly people die from cold weather in Siberia than in Scotland. It is clear that we have lessons to learn. The report states that deaths can be prevented if measures are taken to keep pensioners warm in their homes during the winter months. However, that is only part of what we need to do. As Paul Martin said, in addressing the worrying increase in excess winter deaths we must consider the matter under a number of headings, including general health care, nutrition, insulation and improvements to heating systems.

What has been done, and what is being done, to address the problems? It is not all bad news. I am not about to excoriate the Executive, but it is worth while underlining the fact that the 1999 Labour manifesto stated that Labour aimed to eliminate fuel poverty over two terms of the Parliament. By 2002, that commitment had changed to the effect that the Executive would

"ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, that people are not living in fuel poverty in Scotland by November 2016."

In other words, the commitment was watered down.

Praise is due to the Scottish Executive under a number of headings. The central heating scheme and the warm deal programme, which replaced the previous Conservative home energy efficiency scheme, have increased the grants that are available and they have undoubtedly been successful. I welcome the Executive's recent decision to continue with the central heating programme, but there have been no groundbreaking initiatives. Perhaps that needs to be looked at.

Of course, the biggest contributor to the reduction in fuel poverty has been privatisation of the utilities. The introduction of competition into the market meant that domestic energy prices in Scotland fell significantly. From 1991 to 1996—just five years—the number of fuel-poor households in the United Kingdom fell by at least 1.5 million. That is part of the good news story.

What is to happen in the future? I fully welcome the continuation of schemes for heating and housing insulation. As I said, the Executive is due credit for that. However, health care problems must be dealt with. As we know, the national health service in greater Glasgow inevitably faces increasing pressure during winter. The NHS has a major role to play in combating excess winter deaths, but we must examine how it operates and consider whether lessons can be learned from what is happening down south.

The risk of an avian flu epidemic has been out of the spotlight in recent weeks, but it still hangs over us. The Executive, working with the UK Government, must ensure that tested measures are in place to deal with any outbreak. If they are not, the elderly and those who live in urban areas such as Glasgow will suffer most.

We have seen some progress, but until we have cut excess winter deaths, we will not have made the progress that we all wish to have.

I congratulate Paul Martin on securing the debate. Before he wonders why a Borders representative is speaking, I say that my mother is a born and bred Glaswegian, so I have some qualification for entry into the debate.

Bill Aitken mentioned Siberia. When the phenomenon of excess winter deaths was first understood in Scotland, the Scandinavians were asked for their opinion. They had no knowledge of an excess winter deaths phenomenon, although their climate is generally much harsher than Scotland's.

I will comment on three issues that are mentioned towards the end of the motion: insulation, appliances and extensions to the gas main. For many years, I was the head of the professional staff of the Gas Consumers Council in Scotland, so I have considerable experience of dealing with such matters. Things have moved on in six years but—depressingly—some of the issues remain as they were when I left the council in 1999.

Insulation is of course essential. We still need to do more on insulation, although the warm deal programme is effective. We must understand that insulation standards in the past proceeded in what was perceived to be the right way at the time. For example, insulation in roofs was limited to a certain depth, whereas we now understand that the depth should be greater. Therefore, it is not fair to say that we have effectively dealt with a number of properties. We might have done so in years gone by, but we must revisit many properties to ensure that they have higher, better and more modern insulation levels.

It is fine to have insulation in a house, but if someone has no effective means of heating their house, they are at risk of cold-related diseases. The appliance population, particularly in the gas industry, is aging. The traditional warm-air unit that is found in social housing and in some private sector housing has largely reached the end of its natural life, as have some traditional units that can be found in properties, such as the famous Baxi Bermuda. Replacing such appliances, particularly in social rented housing, is a huge problem. The Executive must develop its central heating programme to cope with that phenomenon.

For example, if I remember my experience correctly, excess winter deaths are most prevalent in properties that have partial central heating. People may move between cold and warmer parts of a house because the central heating system is inadequate. When appliances in general are reaching the end of their natural lives, much work must be done on identifying what is to be done to install better and more efficient appliances that heat whole houses.

In that regard, it is important to understand that the replacement of a partial central heating system with a full central heating system may actually result in a house having higher levels of energy consumption. That is because, with the increase in comfort levels, the household will take advantage of the ability to use the system to heat the whole house such that the fuel bill rises. For that reason, the installation of insulation must go hand in hand with the replacement of appliances that provide only a partial central heating system.

I will mention briefly extensions to the gas main.

You must be very brief.

Over the past 10 years, the extensions to the gas main that should have taken place have not happened. Such opportunities exist but their economic viability is assessed by a regulator that does not understand, and has not understood, the advantages that could result from using systems of extending the gas network that are different from the traditional methods that have been used in the past 10 years.

There is a great need for energy industry regulators to focus their attention in a different way by concentrating less on competition and more on dealing with practical issues such as excess winter deaths and security of supply. Until we have the new regulatory focus for which I have argued publicly today as on previous occasions, the measures that we need to combat the phenomenon of excess winter deaths will not be advanced across Scotland or the United Kingdom.

I congratulate Paul Martin on securing the debate on his motion. From the copy that I have before me, I see that my name is missing from the list of supporters of the motion. I assure him that that is due to oversight rather than for any other reason.

Perhaps what pleases me most about the content of the motion is that it takes an holistic approach. The motion acknowledges that a range of factors, including nutrition, exercise, and clothing, need to be taken into account. However, all members will recognise that fuel poverty, although not the only factor, is of central importance.

The reasons why we need to reduce demand for energy are many and varied, but they include fuel poverty. We have some level of control over, and some ability to influence, energy efficiency but that is really the only factor by which we can influence fuel poverty. We cannot do much about energy prices, which we know will continue to rise throughout this century as the period of cheap energy—the fantasy of cheap energy—comes to an end. We will see much higher energy prices for all types of energy demand, but fuel for the home will certainly be affected. If we do nothing to reduce energy demand, fuel poverty will continue.

Other reasons for reducing energy demand include climate change, security of supply and, of course, the fact that controversy accompanies virtually every form of energy generation. Whether energy is generated by, in my view, aesthetically beautiful wind farms or nasty ugly nuclear power plants—whatever side of the line members fall on in that debate—energy generation is, we all recognise, a difficult thing to get support for.

Given all those reasons for reducing energy demand, how can we do that? There are many ways of reducing demand, some of which the Executive is working on. Having been accused by the Deputy Minister for Communities of lacking Christmas spirit in yesterday's debate because I would not applaud the work that is being done, let me say that this Tiny Tim is full of Christmas spirit and is happy to agree that much of the Executive's work is heading in the right direction. The reasons for my criticism yesterday were that progress should be faster and greater and is currently too slow.

If we are to put in place the housing and energy supply that will enable people to live without fuel poverty and to heat their homes properly in a period of high energy prices, we need to get that stuff physically in place as soon as possible. We need to do that before the problem becomes extreme, but that is already starting to happen.

On that note, I commend to members Shiona Baird's proposal for a member's bill on micro-renewable power. Her proposals would offer individual householders a rebate from their council tax for the installation of the kit, and, over the years, they would contribute to the energy supply for our country and see a reduction in their household fuel bills. Although the Executive is talking about a pilot scheme including some form of micro-renewables alongside the central heating programme, that pilot will take some time to establish what we already know—that micro-renewables are a necessary part of the solution. Shiona Baird's proposal for a member's bill goes much further. I encourage all members to read the consultation and to contribute positively to it.

I was interested to hear Paul Martin's remarks on street-level targeting of local areas. That is an important aspect not just with regard to this issue, but in a wide range of public services and Government spending. We are not getting the maximum bang for the bucks that we are spending, which we could get if we targeted that spending at the level of individual streets.

Twenty years ago at this time of year, I was employed as a field supervisor working from the Pollokshaws Salvation Army building on behalf of Strathclyde Regional Council. I was employed on the hypothermia programme. Our job was to chap on doors and identify whether there was a pensioner living in a household. If there was, we would offer advice, including a pack with a leaflet and a wee thermometer. We became known as the blue thermometer brigade because we told the pensioners that they should attach the thermometer to somewhere in their home where they spent a lot of time and, if the indicator ever reached the blue level, they would know that they had a problem. The difficulty was that, if the indicator ever reached the blue level, it was probably too late for them to do anything.

That was 20 years ago. Strathclyde Regional Council developed the hypothermia programme because of the scandal of excess winter deaths across the Strathclyde region and particularly in Glasgow. Strathclyde region is no more; the community programme is no more; however, I am afraid that excess winter deaths are still very much alive and kicking. The grim reaper that means that Glasgow is top of the unenviable league for winter deaths is poverty. Places such as Aberdeen and Dundee, and countries such as Norway and Sweden, have a colder climate. Why does Glasgow top the league for excess winter deaths? The common denominator is poverty.

That is why I welcome Paul Martin's motion. It is a good motion and I am glad that he has secured the debate. I welcome the holistic approach that is suggested in the motion and recognise the many issues that it raises. However, I hope that Paul Martin will accept that one feature that he mentions—"maximising incomes"—must be the priority if we are serious about tackling excess winter deaths. Poverty is the fundamental factor that determines the life chances of our pensioners during the winter months.

It is regrettable, but we do not have control over fuel prices. Is it not a pity that the £6.7 billion of profit that is made by the utility companies goes into private pockets instead of the Exchequer, when those companies should be publicly owned as they used to be? Perhaps Paul Martin, as a socialist, agrees with me about that—I think that he was nodding there, but perhaps he has to think of his future career so cannot nod furiously.

However, we control some elements that could lead to an improvement in the life chances of our pensioners. One of those elements is energy efficiency, which Patrick Harvie spoke about. It is a pity that during the progress of the Housing (Scotland) Bill, motions and amendments from the Greens and the Scottish socialists that proposed to set real targets for energy efficiency and improve the ability of our elderly to keep their homes warm were rejected by the Executive. The other aspect that we control is the ability to improve incomes, although we cannot do that in the way that we would like. Let us be clear that, as a small country that is rich in natural resources, we should be able to introduce a higher pension for our pensioner citizens.

It is within our control to improve the disposable income of our pensioners and Paul Martin, as a member of the Local Government and Transport Committee, is more aware of that than anyone. We could replace the unfair council tax with an income-based system that would allow pensioners to keep more money in their pockets so that they could purchase the fuel that they require to keep them warm and alive during the winter months.

I support the motion in Paul Martin's name. It is right that we are having this debate. However, instead of warm words, we need action and more of it to address maximising the income of those pensioners who are most at risk of hypothermia and premature death.

I join others in congratulating Paul Martin on securing this timely debate. We have such debates every year, but this year it is, because of the prospect of a severe winter, even more important that we address the issues and consider how we can resolve matters.

I have one of the blue thermometers that Tommy Sheridan mentioned. I check it regularly and because my husband, Fergus, is a bit of a hothouse plant, he makes sure that it does not go to blue. It is ridiculous that people in Scotland still have to measure the temperature in their homes. It is often difficult for confused elderly people to understand how to measure the temperature in their homes.

As always in such debates, I register my non-pecuniary interest as the vice-president of Energy Action Scotland, which has already been referred to, and as the founding member of the warm homes group in Westminster. I advise colleagues who have stayed for the debate that in March next year the warm homes group, headed by my successor convener, Alan Simpson MP, will visit our Parliament. It is important that we give the group a good welcome because, given our limited powers, we have to work closely with Westminster. Many of the issues, such as the citizen's pension, improved bonuses or whatever we want to call them for our elderly and vulnerable people, are still very much in the hands of Westminster. That is not according to my wishes, but I always try to deal with the realities of the situation as best I can.

You will remember, Presiding Officer, because you were a colleague of mine on the benches of the House of Commons at the time, that when I started asking questions in the 1970s about deaths from hypothermia and about excess winter deaths, I was told that people died from hypothermia only if they got lost on mountains and that there was no such thing as excess winter deaths resulting from fuel poverty. I was derided and laughed at by many people; I remember radio programmes on which every other political party attacked me and said that I was scaring pensioners about putting on their fires.

We have come a long way from that. Every political party now regards fuel poverty as a subject that must be addressed. I have applauded every initiative that the Executive, Westminster and voluntary organisations have taken to improve the lot of the 250,000 households in Scotland that still exist in fuel poverty. In my constituency of Moray, 21 per cent of households are in fuel poverty and in Grampian last year, there were 320 excess winter deaths. This is a Scotland-wide issue and although Paul Martin's motion concentrates on greater Glasgow, I know that he will not be selfish and insist that, as we should under Parliament's regulations, we deal only with a particular geographical area. The issues are the same throughout the country and, indeed, throughout the United Kingdom.

We have rightly concentrated, as always when debating this matter, on elderly people, who are most vulnerable. I always take as my starting point for consideration of fuel poverty the housing condition survey of 2002, because it allows us easily to identify areas where there is a need for changes in housing systems, insulation and so on. It makes it quite clear that elderly people are most vulnerable and that we should concentrate on them.

We should also consider households in which a family member is disabled and lacks mobility, because mobility is one aspect of keeping warm. We have not extended our consideration to households with young children. Several members who are present attended a meeting of Energy Action Scotland at which the point was made that the warm deal should be extended to include other vulnerable groups.

Every 10 per cent increase in fuel prices brings another 60,000 houses in Scotland into fuel poverty. I say to Bill Aitken and Tommy Sheridan that that is the case regardless of whether the utilities are privately or publicly owned. Instead of allowing the situation to deteriorate, we should fight and argue for more control over fuel prices and for the powers to ensure that vulnerable people are not caught in yet another poverty trap.

I thank Paul Martin for bringing this essential debate to Parliament. He concentrated on Glasgow, where last winter the number of excess winter deaths rose from 410 to 460. The total number of winter-related deaths in the past three years in Scotland is 8,000. That is totally unacceptable.

People ask how there can be winter-related deaths. Tommy Sheridan hit the nail on the head—they are caused by poverty. In 2002, I listened to Andrew Smith present his green paper on the magnificent new method of topping up pensions. However, the green paper admitted that the Government was budgeting for uptake by only two thirds of pensioners, because the benefit is means tested. Means testing is the most depraved way of taking money out of pensioners' pockets that was ever devised. People may not apply for pension credit because they object to means testing; one third of pensioners do not apply for it. However, people can get a magnificent—I am not being sarcastic when I call it magnificent—free home heating system installed only if they are on pension credit. Means testing automatically excludes one third of the pensioner population of the country from accessing that free system. It should be open to all.

When people apply for a new system, the threshold is far too high. If they have a 40-year-old storage heating system in their house with an electric fire in another room, they do not qualify because they have two sources of heating. If people are over 80, they get the benefit automatically, but an awful lot of poor pensioners will not reach 80 years of age because of winter-related death.

It is about people's fear of turning on their heating. They wonder whether they can afford it. We live in the fourth richest society in the world, but we are telling people that they cannot turn on their heating—they are afraid that they will be unable to pay their bills. There have been swingeing increases across the board for all fuel sources and pensioners are being deprived. Until such time as the Executive upgrades the system, removes means testing and changes the eligibility threshold, we will have more and more winter-related deaths in this country.

For the 21st century, it is Dickensian to ask people to live in homes that they cannot afford to heat. I know that Patrick Harvie does not like this idea, but people had coal fires in days gone by. Coal was cheap—it lay underneath much of Scotland. Now, we need to pay more for our fuel and many older people cannot afford to do so. Poverty is the problem, not winter-related deaths. Until the Westminster Government tackles the pensions problem, we will never get out of the situation.

I thank Paul Martin for securing the debate, in which there have been many sincere and genuine speeches. I emphasise that the heart of the problem is that pensions are not sufficient for pensioners to heat their homes, and they live in fear of being unable to pay their bills.

Finally, I call Christine Grahame.

I am beginning to feel as if "Finally, I call Christine Grahame" is my tune for the day. I had thought that you were going to say that I could "squeeze in two minutes"—that could have been your other line, Presiding Officer.

This has been an interesting debate. I say to Paul Martin that my father is 90, and he has internet access—there are plenty of them out there. I thank Euan Robson for telling me that there is something called an appliance population. I will bear that in mind.

The subject of the debate is of course serious. Tommy Sheridan and others hit the nail on the head in saying that the root of the problem is poverty. It is as simple as that. I am afraid that this Parliament is very limited in respect of what it can do about poverty. The measures that have been taken are, however, to be commended, including the warm deal and the central heating programme, although it could be improved and extended. At the moment, people are excluded from it if they have two working radiators in their house. That is wrong. In harsh financial terms, if we keep people warm, we save money through their not suffering ill health.

Some of the statistics are absolutely disgraceful for an energy-rich nation, and there has not really been an improvement in the number of excess winter deaths. According to a parliamentary written answer that I received, there were 2,310 excess winter deaths in 1994-95. In 2003-04, that figure had gone up to 2,840. Nothing has happened to improve the situation; it is getting worse. In the peak years of 1998 to 2000, when there was an influenza epidemic, the figure doubled to 5,000 excess winter deaths a year. As has already been said by Margaret Ewing and others, with the current threat of a flu pandemic combined with a severe winter, it is not scaremongering to say that the figure might rise considerably again.

The reality is that one in five pensioners in Scotland lives in poverty. John Swinburne was quite right to mention that a third of people who are entitled to pension credit simply do not apply for it. I once brought the form into Parliament. It has about 68 pages, and people need a PhD in form filling to get the credit. That is a bar to pensioners' receiving the credit. Four out of 10 of those who are entitled to council tax benefit do not apply for it. If we consider other statistics for elderly people, we find that 37 per cent of them are living in fuel poverty. If we add to that the 10 per cent who are on the cusp of being in fuel poverty, half of pensioners cannot afford to heat their homes. That is not the case in Finland or Denmark. In Finland, there is only a 10 per cent excess in winter deaths; in Denmark, it is 12 per cent. In Scotland, it is 16 per cent. We are top of the wrong league.

The Scottish Gas and Help the Aged partnership recommended that a lead be taken on commissioning research into the many contributory factors to excess winter deaths. I know that that is not being done, because I asked a parliamentary question about research and was told that no study in those specific terms was being undertaken. That was a year ago, and there has not been an update.

We need to be honest and to examine what can be done with our limited powers. We have to conduct research on what can be done about poor insulation, on the fact that people are not getting their benefits, and on the facts that people have old appliances that do not work properly and they do not know how to maintain an even temperature in their homes. Some people think that switching all the heating off and then putting it on in quick blasts is an efficient way to bring a room up to a decent temperature, but exactly the opposite is the case.

As with my question to the First Minister about childhood obesity and deprivation, the answer is always about poverty. It is as simple as that.

I congratulate Paul Martin on securing the debate and on the way in which he highlighted clearly the challenges and provided a great deal of food for thought with the creative solutions that he identified. I acknowledge that everyone who participated in the debate approached the subject seriously. Important contributions were made, on which I will reflect.

The issue of excess winter deaths is complex and many factors come into play. Although the causes are not fully understood, the Executive is working to address the needs of Scotland's vulnerable older people and other vulnerable groups in a number of ways. I take Paul Martin's point: I am always anxious that when someone says, "Let's do a bit of research," it provides an opportunity to put a brake on action.

We have to consider what is happening in relation to excess winter death. It is not simply—or even predominantly—about hypothermia, because other factors come into play. It is about identifying vulnerable people and ensuring that there is support for them. It is important to put the Glasgow figures in the context of Glasgow's ill health. The issue of excess winter deaths relates more broadly to health inequalities, what we are prepared to do to address them and how money is invested throughout the Executive to do so.

Sandra White mentioned the importance of the index of multiple deprivation—poverty of place has an impact. We have to accept the consequences of targeted decisions, and although we have general spend in relation to older people, we also need targeted spend if we are to meet the needs of vulnerable groups. That is a difficult argument and a difficult balance to strike. It is particularly evident that we have to get the balance right in relation to pensioner poverty and fuel poverty.

I was particularly interested in Paul Martin's comment about IT. We have understood the issue of IT in relation to isolated, rural and remote communities and investment has been made in helping people connect to computers and so on. We might need to reflect further on how we deal with people who are isolated in their communities because of their age and we need to be much more imaginative about how we get information to them. We provide information, but do we provide it in a way that allows people to benefit from it?

We need to put the issue in the context of our broader policy. When members were talking about the levels of winter-related excess deaths and the cold, I remembered that when I was a child our house was cold except when we were near the fire, but I also remember that older people were part of a community where people round about them were willing to go and find out whether they were okay. I do not think that I am just looking back to a golden age when communities felt safer. Our programme is about community safety and making people feel safer is part of that.

Recently I was involved in a housing project in the Gorbals, where the people understood that supporting an older person is not just about managing their care, but about considering the things that make them feel more alive and more involved in the community, such as being taken to church. The broader context of identifying vulnerable people and having a community response is important.

I acknowledge the issue of pensioner poverty and poverty more generally. It is certainly my driver in relation to a range of issues, particularly those that are to do with multiple deprivation. The Executive is tackling pensioner poverty in Scotland in partnership with the UK Government. I thought that the Scottish National Party might have congratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer on his willingness to tax the oil companies to invest in public services.

There are almost 190,000, or almost three quarters, fewer pensioners living in absolute poverty and 100,000, or more than one third, fewer living in relative poverty than there were in 1997.

The Executive is providing free central heating. I say to John Swinburne that it is open to all—people do not have to be on pension credit to get it—because we accept that there is a balance of spend on that. We are also providing free local off-peak bus travel, which we are extending to make it a national scheme, and free personal and nursing care.

We are helping to improve benefits uptake through a range of measures, which include our benefits health checks under the central heating programme and funding for the Scottish helpline for older people. However, I acknowledge that more has to be done and that we must use the avenues for giving information more imaginatively than we have in the past, and that we must use fora such as the older people's consultative forum.

Those measures complement benefits that the UK Government provides, such as pension credit, council tax and housing benefit, the winter fuel payment, free television licences and the £200 council tax refund. Overall, the tax and benefit measures that have been introduced since 1997 are worth an extra £30 per week to Scottish pensioner households, with the poorest 20 per cent getting about £40 a week extra. More pension reforms are planned.

We acknowledge the points that Margaret Ewing and other members made. The issue remains one with which we must wrestle. We have to get down to the practicalities of delivering measures. We are all aware that, in many cases, our older citizens struggle to pay their fuel bills, which is why we have invested more than £200 million so far in the central heating programme and the warm deal. I appreciated Patrick Harvie's kind comments on that matter. I am glad that he has caught up with the Christmas cheer, if belatedly. As the Housing (Scotland) Bill made its passage through the Parliament, we debated energy efficiency. We did not agree absolutely on that, but the issue was acknowledged. The Scottish Green Party engaged with the debate at every stage of the bill's consideration, but it is perhaps a little disingenuous of Tommy Sheridan to suggest that the Scottish Socialist Party pressed anyone on the matter, because its members were absent from the debate in committee and in Parliament they piggybacked on an amendment from the Greens.

We have put central heating systems into more than 60,000 homes and we have insulated more than 218,000—almost one tenth of Scotland's housing stock. Those programmes represent the biggest investment ever in a home energy efficiency programme in Scotland and they are aimed at Scotland's most vulnerable households, which include people—specifically older people—whose health or general well-being may be at risk from cold and damp housing. The programmes also offer advice. Not only do they make people's homes warm and comfortable, but they help them to save money on fuel bills, too.

As Bill Aitken said, we are committed to our target of eradicating fuel poverty as far as is reasonably practicable by 2016. However, that is only one part of our approach. The results on benefits uptake are encouraging, because benefits can make a difference.

Paul Martin made an important point on the energy companies. It appears that, currently, they reward people who are more prosperous and charge more to those who are already in poverty. We are working closely with them to address that and we have been pressing them to introduce special social tariffs for their most vulnerable customers in order to protect them from the impact of recent fuel price increases. We are pleased that all the companies have taken steps in that direction, but we want far more progress, because we realise that recent fuel price increases make it more important than ever for more companies to go further.

I acknowledge the efforts that the Executive is making to talk to energy companies. In those discussions, will the minister discuss the profile of appliances in the marketplace? That will help to inform development of the central heating programme and to target it where it will have most effect.

I am happy to pursue that point.

I highlight to members the home heat helpline, which has been organised by a group of energy companies that want to give information to older and poorer clients so that they do not suffer from the cold of winter. It is also important that agencies across the board work in a joined-up manner, examine what is happening in our communities and address those issues.

I am happy to confirm to Sandra White that we are developing an older people strategy. We want to take an integrated approach to all aspects of supporting older people, which is why we are developing a strategy for an aging population. Malcolm Chisholm chairs an external advisory group on which Help the Aged and Scottish Gas are both represented, because we recognise that we cannot sort things out by talking to ourselves. Government needs to understand and to track those who identify need and establish solutions and must work with them to make progress.

A strategy that will be launched next year will set out a framework for giving older people access to opportunities to allow them to make a continuing contribution; for ensuring an effective integrated service for older people; for promoting and maintaining health and well-being; and for supporting people to live in accommodation and environments that continue to meet their needs and wishes as they age. I stress that this is not about managing a problem that affects older people, but about supporting people so that they get what they need. In that respect, the most fundamental need must be good health in a safe and warm environment.

I take very seriously the challenging points that members have made. As I have said, by developing the central heating programme and other Executive initiatives, I will continue to ensure that those points are addressed.

Meeting suspended until 14:15.

On resuming—