The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-17484, in the name of Beatrice Wishart, on the radio teleswitch service switch-off. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
I encourage members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons now or as soon as possible, and I call Beatrice Wishart to open the debate.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament is concerned that the Radio Teleswitch Service (RTS), used by energy suppliers for some electricity meters, particularly in island and rural areas, to control heating and hot water systems, is set to end on 30 June 2025, with tens of thousands of customers across Scotland reportedly expected to be impacted as they are yet to have their RTS meter exchanged; understands that, in areas such as the Highlands and Islands region and other parts of rural Scotland, many households are still waiting for a meter exchange and that, as of the end of April 2025, Shetland still had 4,490 meters to be exchanged ahead of the deadline; further understands that energy companies are not replacing meters at the pace required before the deadline; considers that large areas of Scotland face technical issues with connecting smart meters and a lack of engineers; notes the view that functioning heating and hot water systems are fundamental to an adequate standard of living and that changes to metering technology should not leave households, particularly those in island and rural communities, financially worse off than they are on their current tariff, or facing the possibility of losing heating and hot water after the switch-off of the RTS signal; further notes the calls on local resilience partnerships to ready themselves for the potential adverse outcomes of the RTS switch-off, which may include thousands of homes being left without heating and hot water, and notes the calls to plug the gaps in smart meter coverage to ensure that rural areas are not disadvantaged due to their poor connectivity.
18:03
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am sorry not to join members in the chamber in person this evening.
I thank members who have supported the motion and those who plan to speak in the debate. I also thank the organisations that have provided briefings ahead of the debate and those with which I have met over the past few months to discuss this serious infrastructure failing. I know that citizens advice bureaux across the Highlands and Islands are working hard to help people through the change, and I put on record my thanks to them all, including the Shetland bureaux, and to the other organisations that are doing the same across the country.
There are just 40 days to go until the nationwide radio teleswitch service switch-off deadline on 30 June. To be frank, however, I think that where we have got to with the switch-off is depressing, frustrating and entirely avoidable—it is, in my view, a national disgrace.
Although the RTS switch-off could be considered a purely reserved matter, it could, based on the latest figures, impact around 125,000 Scottish households, including 22,500 in Glasgow and just over 17,000 in Edinburgh. I urge local authorities and local resilience partnerships to ready themselves for any potential adverse outcomes of the switch-off, which might include thousands of homes being left without heating and hot water.
RTS was a revolution when it was developed in the 1980s as a means of switching electricity meters between different tariff rates at different times of the day, allowing for the cost-effective and efficient use of storage heaters. The signal to switch between timings is broadcast by the BBC, which has had a long-standing arrangement with the Energy Networks Association to transmit a teleswitching signal on the BBC Radio 4 long-wave frequency.
Support for the RTS signal will end on 30 June—a date that has already been pushed back at least twice—and the technology that supports the signal is reportedly already well past its end of life. That also means that it could stop working at any time, so there is a chance of disruption to the service ahead of the deadline.
The RTS and Radio 4 long-wave signal shutdown has been on the cards for a decade now, and it is completely unacceptable that households that rely on RTS for their heating and hot water have been left in limbo. The solution is to exchange RTS meters, which sounds simple. For many years, however, constituents have been contacting me—and other MSPs, as I know—about both the lack of engineers and the lack of connectivity to switch an RTS meter to a smart meter. Even replacing a broken meter has been fraught with difficulties over the years. We have been promised technological fixes in advance of the switch-off, yet we are, at the 59th minute of the 11th hour, still finding that there has been limited development in technology or in greater connectivity to the smart meter signal.
At the current rate of meter exchanges, it will take more than a year for all remaining RTS meters in Shetland to be exchanged, including the Shetland parliamentary office meter. Another short extension of the deadline will not solve the issue, and, if the switch-off happens in autumn or winter, the problems that it will cause will be exacerbated by cold weather.
As things stand, energy companies must increase their efforts to exchange all outstanding meters ahead of the 30 June deadline. However, it is still unclear what will happen when the signal is turned off and an RTS meter has not been exchanged. Storage heaters and the systems that heat water might remain off, leaving households in the cold, or they might remain switched on, which raises concerns about what could happen if heat continues to build in them. We simply do not know what will happen.
For thousands of households, therefore, this is a very stressful time. The impact is disproportionate in the Highlands and Islands; in places with high levels of fuel poverty; in the colder parts of the country that rely on heating all year round, including in the summer; where homes have low levels of insulation, are reliant on oil or electricity for heat and power and have no connection to the gas network; and where engineers are few and far between. It cannot be acceptable for energy companies to leave their customers without power, heat and hot water, nor is it acceptable that customers should be left in the potentially dangerous situation of systems possibly overheating.
Energy companies are responsible for ensuring that their customers’ meters are changed over from the old RTS system, but companies across the market have not covered themselves in glory during this period, with variable response levels to their customers on the issue and an insufficient number of engineers. OVO Energy is the main energy supplier in Shetland, but its lack of informed and efficient customer service has taken up an inordinate amount of time and capacity within my office team, who have supported many constituents through this shambles. OVO’s performance since it took over the domestic customers of SSE Energy Services has shown that it was not set up to take on the task that it faced in rural and island areas, and its failure to retain local engineers has come home to roost in this period ahead of the switch-off.
Customers have been let down, waiting at home all day only to find out that their engineer did not arrive as a result of not having prepared properly for the logistics of island travel. Just this morning, I heard from a constituent in one of the north isles of Shetland who had waited over a month for the only appointment that was available to him from OVO. After he stayed at home all day yesterday, no engineer turned up, without explanation. We learned this afternoon that the engineer had not booked himself on to the ferry to get to the island and it had been full, with no spare capacity. The constituent has complained to the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, which has also, until recently, been missing in action in this debacle.
OVO was in Shetland in March and engaged face to face with local stakeholders as well as local customers—yet, even after that, it is failing its customers. OVO, along with other energy companies, has sent teams of engineers north, in the so-called spring surge, in a bid to exchange meters ahead of the deadline. However, it is too little too late, and customers are paying the price.
Scotland-specific tariffs have been removed in place of generic United Kingdom-wide rates, and the tariffs vary by company. Questions are still going unanswered about whether households will be stuck on higher rates after the switch-off. Customers will be unlikely to want to do battle yet again with their supplier to change tariffs, but why should they be stuck paying a higher rate? Moreover, if the heating is jammed on, how long will it take to notice that, fix it and make sure that the right tariff is reinstated? There simply should not be that much uncertainty so close to a nationwide shutdown of technology.
At the spring Scottish Liberal Democrat conference last month, I put forward a successful motion that set out practical steps to better prepare for the switch-off. Urgent action is long overdue.
As we move to the open debate, I advise the chamber that there is a lot of interest in the subject, and therefore I must ask members to stick to their speaking time allocation.
18:10
I thank Beatrice Wishart for bringing this important and urgent debate to the chamber, and I fully support her motion.
The RTS switch-off is of great concern to people across the UK, but the impact is particularly acute for those in rural communities, such as in my Carrick, Cumnock, and Doon Valley constituency, where many homes are off the mains gas grid and there remain many socially rented homes with electric heating tied to this antiquated technology.
As Scotland has nearly 135,000 RTS meters, we are set to be the hardest hit by the change by population share. We know from the briefing that was provided by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations that it is very concerned for its tenants, who are disproportionately impacted.
I will share with members the experience of one couple who contacted me. They have an older-style meter, which uses RTS, to supply their heating, electricity and hot water. They were contacted by Scottish Power last August to inform them that they were eligible for a smart meter. They diligently booked their appointment, but it was cancelled by the engineers at the last minute, as it was decided that their meter would not be compatible for replacement. They tried again; another appointment was booked, and there was another cancellation. Then, there was absolute radio silence, with no updates and no solutions, which led to my office becoming involved.
An appointment to replace the couple’s meter has now been set for June—which is really close to the switch-off date—but, understandably, they are very worried about whether that will finally resolve the situation, given the complexities that so many have faced. For example, in some cases, engineers have arrived to discover that the existing set-up has too many cables for them to be able to complete the swap-out. That seems to be a common denominator in people’s experiences—there are too many cables in the old meters.
If there is no fix, either the couple will have no electricity or hot water come the switch-off or they will be forced to pay a higher rate as the meter defaults to that rate without any applicable discounts. Conversely, as we heard from Ms Wishart, the heating might be stuck on, with no respite for the household from continual heat. Even if the couple are able to have their meter replaced, Scottish Power is unable to assure them that they will stay on their current tariff. That goes against Ofgem’s pledge that
“no customer should be worse off”
as a result of the change. As we have heard today, stories like that are repeating themselves across the country, with members of the public doing their best to prepare themselves but experiencing constant pushback that is outwith their control.
Suppliers and consumers are now facing a ticking time bomb ahead of an ever-nearing cut-off date. Unfortunately, I and many of the people from whom I have heard have no confidence that the change will go smoothly. Beatrice Wishart referred to the situation as a “shambles”, and it absolutely is. It is completely unacceptable, and the UK Government and Ofgem must take action immediately. The switch-off date needs to be postponed, or there needs to be an assurance that anyone who is financially impacted will receive full compensation.
I welcome the Acting Minister for Climate Action’s comment that
“the Scottish Government is doing everything it can, within our limited devolved powers, to mitigate the impact.”
Ultimately, however, this is a reserved issue, so the United Kingdom Government must take responsibility and control and step up to the plate to ensure that no one is negatively impacted by the change. I also agree with Beatrice Wishart that local resilience partnerships should be preparing themselves for what might happen come the shut-off.
Households across the country are already struggling financially with the cost of living crisis and economic uncertainty, so this really is the last thing that they need to be dealing with right now. The situation is especially urgent given the number of individuals with such meters who are already in poverty and are dealing with unrelenting fuel poverty.
I hope that members in the chamber can unite today to send a clear message that the situation cannot be allowed to spiral any further. Action is urgently needed to protect our constituents and give them the peace of mind that they deserve.
18:14
I am grateful to Beatrice Wishart for securing a debate on what is becoming an increasingly serious issue, for many of the reasons that have been mentioned.
Some time ago, I realised that the 30 June deadline would be too soon for many residents across the Highlands and Islands region and, indeed, in other parts of rural Scotland. As Beatrice Wishart rightly identifies in her motion, there is “a lack of engineers” on the ground, which is preventing the rapid switch-over from RTS to smart meters.
I am sure that every MSP who represents island communities will know that, whether we are talking about installing broadband, fitting new insulation or making the switch to a smart meter, every supplier will send contractors to an island only if there are several jobs to complete and only if there is overnight accommodation available for them. That is increasingly difficult to find in the summer months, as accommodation is booked out in advance—indeed, I know that problem all too well from other active constituency casework.
The number of households in the Highlands and Islands that have yet to make the switch from an RTS meter to a smart meter is staggering. Data supplied to me by Ofgem in February showed that more than 36,000 RTS meters are still in operation across the region. Just for context, that amounts to around 4 per cent of all active RTS meters remaining in operation across Great Britain, despite the fact that the Highlands and Islands accounts for fewer than 1 per cent of dwellings in Great Britain.
I realise that Ofgem has taken the task seriously, and I welcome its commitment to rapidly increasing the pace and number of RTS upgrades by targeting regions where RTS meters are most prevalent. However, according to Citizens Advice Scotland, many people in rural and island communities face an acute challenge in trying to secure a smart meter installation. That includes one elderly couple in their 80s from a rural community, who repeatedly contacted their energy supplier after receiving a letter about the switch-off but who have yet to secure a meter engineer visit.
In addition, according to the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, its members have stated that energy suppliers do not have the capacity to switch all RTS consumers for whom a smart meter will be appropriate by the 2025 deadline. Given that the UK Government has already delayed its digital switch-over for landline phones from December 2025 to January 2027, there is surely a case for a similar delay to the RTS switch-off, to ensure that every household is able to upgrade.
However, even for those lucky enough to have secured a smart meter, issues with unreliable broadband and mobile connectivity have resulted in smart meter connectivity issues, and Citizens Advice Scotland has reported the loss of heating in some instances as a result. That probably cannot have been helped by the Scottish National Party Government’s failure to deliver the roll-out of its reaching 100 per cent—R100—broadband programme almost a decade on from when the promise was first made.
When I last asked for R100 data earlier this year, the SNP Government confirmed that not a single property in the Western Isles had been upgraded to superfast broadband under the scheme.
Will the member take an intervention?
I think that I have time, so yes.
I was not expecting to talk about R100 today, but I should say that we have activated 55 4G masts in areas where economic factors and challenges would have made that otherwise unlikely. Those areas would never have had those upgrades had it not been for the R100 programme. Does the member accept, therefore, that if we had not undertaken the R100 programme, we would be talking about an awful lot more constituents with connectivity issues?
I am talking not about what has been done but about the fact that the programme has not been rolled out according to the deadline that the SNP promised. I was not even trying to make a particularly political point; I was simply making the point that people in the Western Isles have not seen any upgrades in that respect, and good broadband is required for some of the meter upgrades.
Across my region—and this is a further answer for the minister—more than 21,000 premises have yet to receive an upgrade, including more than 3,400 in Moray. It is evident that many households and businesses will not meet the June 2025 deadline, and many people could, as a result, face an energy cliff edge.
I call on the UK Government and Ofgem to consider a delay to the switch-off date so that households across Scotland, including in rural and island communities, can catch up. Similarly, I call on the SNP Government, which has devolved responsibility for rolling out broadband infrastructure, to ensure that there are no more delays to these vital upgrades.
18:19
I thank Beatrice Wishart for securing this debate on an issue that affects people across Scotland, from Glasgow to the Shetland isles.
Figures from Ofgem show that, as of 18 April 2025, there were still 22,579 radio teleswitch service meters in the Glasgow region and that, in the fortnight leading up to 18 April, just 808 meters had been replaced. With some quick mental maths, we can say that, working at the same rate, it would take just over a year for my constituents who are still using the radio teleswitch service to have new meters installed. That would be too late for the thousands of constituents whose RTS meters will be switched off in just six weeks’ time, which succinctly demonstrates what Age Scotland has called, in its briefing, a “looming crisis”.
I thank the organisations that have taken the time to brief MSPs ahead of today’s debate, including the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, Ofgem, Smart Energy GB, Age Scotland and Citizens Advice Scotland. Given the scale of the task before energy suppliers, I share the housing federation’s concern that they do not have the capacity to switch over all RTS consumers for whom a smart meter will be appropriate by the 30 June deadline.
Those who are still using a radio teleswitch service come 30 June could be negatively affected both financially and in their day-to-day lives. Without the ability to control their heating and hot water, many could be left without both, and others will be left with their heating turned on more than they would choose, incurring a cost that they cannot and should not have to afford.
Citizens Advice Scotland reports that some of those who have a new meter installed in the next six weeks will need to rewire or relocate it in order to successfully install it, which could incur other costs. The SFHA shares CAS’s concerns and has highlighted the fact that consumers might face higher energy bills due to changes in the tariffs that are available to them, or as a result of inaccurate information being provided by the supplier.
Given the significant number of RTS meters in housing association properties, the switch-off is an understandable and significant concern for the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, and I am proud to voice that concern on its behalf.
I ask all energy providers to make it an urgent priority between now and 30 June to increase the number of installation appointments and to contact customers who have not switched over.
I ask the Scottish Government to request regular updates from energy providers on the progress that they are making to get the number of customers in Scotland who are still using the RTS down to zero by 30 June, and, in particular, to ask how many of those customers are on the priority services register.
Financial support must be put in place for residents who incur costs because they need to install a new meter through no fault of their own, and energy suppliers should automatically compensate customers whose meters are not replaced before the deadline and who face increased bills as a result of having to use more expensive heating alternatives.
Although I accept that the RTS has come to the end of its operational life, I cannot accept that energy suppliers could not have been more prepared ahead of the 30 June deadline. It is likely to be the hardest to reach in our communities who will struggle the most, including those who are digitally excluded, those who live in fuel poverty and those who live alone.
There is not much time left until the RTS switch-off, and we, as MSPs, should do everything that we can between now and 30 June to ensure that affected constituents are supported financially and practically to replace their meters.
I again thank Beatrice Wishart for securing the debate and bringing focus to this important issue. I look forward to updates from energy suppliers on how they plan to ensure that the 22,579 people in the region that I represent who are still using the RTS will be switched over by 30 June.
18:22
I thank Beatrice Wishart for bringing this members’ business debate to the chamber. She has outlined extremely well the problems that will be caused for her constituents in the northern rural Shetland Islands, and I will highlight issues for Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders.
Beatrice Wishart highlighted that the RTS switch-off is due to the equipment coming to the end of its operational life, and she mentioned how that will affect the rates payable on some meters and, therefore, consumers’ energy bills.
The BBC first outlined its plans for closure of the long-wave broadcasts in 2011. More than a year ago, Radio 4 discontinued its long-wave opt-out programming. A year before that, it began running down opt-out programming on long wave. Extension after extension to the cut-off has been put in place over the years, in large part to allow the distribution companies the time that they claimed they needed to switch over the RTS meters. Yet, here we are, 14 years on and only six weeks from the long wave switch-off, and the most recent numbers that I have show that more than 7,500 households in Dumfries and Galloway and more than 6,000 in the Scottish Borders are at risk of cessation of the service or of receiving sky-high bills once the switch happens.
How do consumers know whether they have an RTS meter? There are a few things to look out for. Do they have a separate box near the meter with a radio switch label on it? Is their property heated using electricity or storage heaters? Is there no mains gas supply? That would apply to about 40 per cent of rural Dumfries and Galloway homes. Another aspect is whether their energy is cheaper at different times of the day, such as is the case with economy 7, economy 10 or total heating, total control tariffs. If people are unsure, they need to contact their energy supplier.
Just as we saw with the spike in energy prices a few years ago, it is householders and bill payers who will have to bear the consequence of the energy industry squeezing them for every penny and refusing to invest in the staffing capacity to switch the meters.
The UK-controlled regulator Ofgem has not so much taken its eye off the ball as kicked it through the nearest window. I know that the engineers will be working flat out to do what they can, but the people who work with the householders day to day have told us of their real concerns. We have heard from Citizens Advice Scotland and Age Concern Scotland about some of the problems that are being faced, such as suppliers needing to do more to increase the number of engineer appointments. Securing engineer visits can be a challenge. Once someone manages to secure one, is the appointment being honoured? People have been told that they need to replace their meters with smart meters. That might not be appropriate for them, but no alternative is offered.
Deputy Presiding Officer, I know that I am approaching the four-minute mark.
There have been 14 years to prepare, but here we are, with six weeks to go. The process sums up UK energy policy in a nutshell: it is short-termist, deregulated, last minute and profit maximising, with shareholder dividends being protected off the backs of consumers. The UK Government’s head is in the sand.
I ask the Scottish Government to do all that it can to support consumers ahead of the fast-approaching June 30 deadline. We need regulatory updating yesterday rather than in the future.
18:26
I thank Beatrice Wishart for securing this important debate. The urgency with which we need to deal with the issue is growing with each passing day.
Scheduled to happen in weeks, the switch-off is not just a technical adjustment but a looming crisis for thousands of households across Scotland, particularly those in rural areas such as my constituency in the Borders.
It is clear that rural communities are being disproportionately affected. It is estimated that, as of early April 2025, around 5,000 households in the Scottish Borders were still using the RTS electricity meters. Many of those homes rely on RTS meters to regulate their heating and hot water, and they often use legacy electric storage systems and off-peak tariffs, such as total heating, total control. Those homes are frequently off grid in hard-to-reach areas, and the issue often affects elderly people and vulnerable residents.
Although urban areas have greater infrastructure for swift meter replacement, rural households, as we know, face barriers in accessing appointments, resolving technical issues and receiving timely follow-ups. In those communities, delays mean not just inconvenience but cold homes and unaffordable bills.
A further concern is the lack of clear and widespread communication from Ofgem and suppliers. Many people have not received adequate information about the RTS switch-off and what it means for them. Even when communication has been issued, it has been vague, overly technical and simply too late, leaving constituents confused about whether they will be affected, what action they need to take and how to get support. The failure to communicate effectively on such a significant national transition is simply unacceptable.
The real impact of the issue is being felt behind closed doors across the Borders. One elderly constituent of mine is from Duns. He is 97, blind and profoundly deaf, and he has been left in limbo while his family has tried since February to secure a replacement RTS meter. Despite repeated attempts at communication with the energy supplier, they have received only mixed messages and no confirmed date for the meter replacement. My constituent now faces the real risk of disruption to heating and hot water—and entirely avoidable stress.
Rachael Hamilton has just highlighted the challenges that some really vulnerable people are facing, especially the 97-year-old person in Duns. Does she agree that many other vulnerable constituents will be facing the same issues?
That is why it is so important that Beatrice Wishart has brought the debate to the chamber. I hope that it will almost be an awareness campaign for those who have not understood what is required of them.
Another constituent based in Coldingham received a replacement smart meter in December after her original RTS meter failed. Despite that, technical issues persisted. Her new meter is still not sending readings to her supplier, and months of chasing emails and phone calls have brought no resolution. With no accurate billing and no clear fix in sight, that constituent remains stuck in a broken system.
Those examples show that the problems are not just about replacing meters, but about ensuring that they work properly and that suppliers provide accountable and timely support. The transition to smart meters should be an opportunity to modernise and improve energy access, but it is being mishandled. Constituents are being moved on to unsuitable tariffs, facing connectivity issues and encountering long waits for engineers.
We cannot let vulnerable people and rural communities, such as the people in the Borders whom I have given examples of today, bear the brunt of this national failure.
18:31
I, too, thank Beatrice Wishart for bringing this important and urgent debate to the chamber. I speak on behalf of my constituents in the Highlands and Islands, many of whom are deeply concerned about the looming switch-off of the radio teleswitch service and the risks that it poses to their wellbeing. It is not just a technical transition but the result of a decision that was made in Westminster with little regard for the unique challenges that rural and island communities in Scotland face. Our most vulnerable residents—older people, those in low-income households and social housing tenants—are being left to bear the brunt.
As of April this year, more than 390,000 RTS meters were still in use across Great Britain. Given the low uptake of smart meters in Scotland—particularly in the northern isles and the Western Isles, where fewer than 10 per cent of households have one—it is fair to assume that a disproportionate number of RTS meters are in my region.
One constituent of mine waited nine months for a resolution that came only after his energy supplier was forced to prove to the data communications company that all other options had failed before it was allowed to install a cellular system. Other constituents have seen action from their energy companies only after I—and my colleagues across the chamber, I am sure—contacted the companies on their behalf. That is not a system that is working for people—it is a system that is failing them.
The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations has raised urgent concerns. Many of its members report that energy suppliers simply do not have the capacity to replace all RTS meters by the 2025 deadline. Worse still, suppliers are not engaging proactively with tenants for whom a smart meter is not a viable option.
What happens after the switch? As other members have said, some tenants are being moved on to more expensive or unsuitable tariffs, often without clear information or consent. Citizens Advice Scotland has already seen cases of people falling into energy debt because their new smart meters do not work properly. That is not just inconvenient; it is pushing people into poverty. We need urgent assurances from Ofgem and the UK Government that no tenant will be penalised for the inaction or delays of energy companies, that there is a robust and fully funded plan to support those who are affected, especially those who lose heating or hot water, and that no one will be left in the cold because of a failure to consult or prepare.
This is a matter of energy justice. It is about ensuring that the transition to smart technology does not leave behind the people who need the most support. I urge colleagues from across the chamber to stand up—as they have said they will—for our rural and island communities and demand a fair, inclusive and properly resourced transition.
18:34
I congratulate Beatrice Wishart on securing this debate on the motion, to which I was a signatory. Much has been said about smart meters—often about their unreliability—but, as has been said, at the end of June, the radio teleswitch service that connects to some people’s meters is being switched off.
Now I take myself and my head into the uncomfortable area, for me, of technology. Here we go. The difference between the position in Scotland and the north of England and that in the south of England is that in the midlands, Wales and southern England all smart meters use cellular technology, similar to mobile phones, to send data to energy providers. In the north of England and Scotland, the situation is different—I say to Tim Eagle that it is the same in the north of England. Here, as in the north of England, there is a long-range radio signal. What I do not understand is why, when the radio teleswitch service is switched off at the end of June, it will be replaced with another long-range radio signal. In Scotland, smart meters will run on that new radio signal and not on the public internet or wi-fi. I hope that that is so far so good, because my head is already birling.
What is the impact? Currently, more than 6,000 households in the Borders and more than 700 in Midlothian have yet to switch. That is bad enough. Besides that, the impact on too many of my constituents is that, even if they want to, they will not be able to connect to a smart meter system, because they cannot receive the new radio signal in their location. I have many constituents in that position. Scottish Power, for example, has advised that it will install instead a white meter. Meters must change because, without a new meter, people’s heating and hot water will be affected. They may find that their heating and hot water are always on or off, or that charging happens at the wrong time of day. Their electricity supplier will not be able to confirm how much electricity they have used for heating and other uses, which means that electricity costs could be much higher for them than before.
If someone’s area has a poor signal, their supplier must still replace their RTS meter to ensure that their heating is not disrupted. I am back in the technical maze again. If someone does not have a smart meter and currently has an RTS meter, they may be on a tariff that charges them a different price for the electricity that they use for their heating and hot water than it does for the rest of their electricity, such as for lighting and appliances. Some tariffs also offer lower rates at specific times of the day. That is a good thing, but it all changes after June.
After June, without a new meter, people’s heating and hot water will be affected. A smart meter would ensure that their heating was not disrupted but, if that is not possible, the provider—Scottish Power, for example—can install a white meter with the tariff pre-programmed. I emphasise that it is pre-programmed. People will have to send in manual readings and will not get the full benefits of a smart meter or any other kind of meter, but at least their heating will continue to work.
The trouble is that most white meters charge a slightly higher daytime price compared with a standard tariff, so it is very likely that people will end up paying a lot more. That brings us beyond the technology to the fact that Scotland is doing badly out of this different system. In the event that it is not possible to install a smart meter, people will perhaps be paying more on the pre-programmed tariff. They have to be the kind of person who does not mind cooler water in the evenings. The system will heat most of their water at night and store it in a storage heater, so their hot water will be hot in the morning and coolest in the evening. However, as I said, most white meters charge a higher tariff for daytime usage, which will apply to many older people and disabled people.
We end up with this technology, with too many of my constituents having to opt for a metering system that is more expensive. That is a bitter pill when the wind turbines around them are producing four times more electricity than the south of Scotland uses. They endure a landscape of pylons, but they pay more for the electricity that is generated on their doorstep.
18:39
I thank Beatrice Wishart for bringing the motion for debate. As we have heard, the closure of the radio teleswitch service on 30 June is fast approaching. I have heard from many constituents who have experienced issues and delays with having meters exchanged. I should declare an interest, as that includes me. It was reported that, at the end of April, 432,000 meters still needed to be replaced in the UK, more than a quarter of which—nearly 135,000—are located in Scotland.
It has been estimated that the rate of replacement is about 6,000 a month. I therefore echo the concern that other members have raised that meters are not being replaced at a rate that will meet the deadline. In fact, at the current rate, it will take six years for the work to be completed.
Many people have had to wait months for an appointment, and for many rural households that are total heating, total control customers, the changeover to a smart meter has been a lot more complex and time consuming than expected, which has added to the delays. I know of constituents whose smart meter installations have failed more than three times due to the wiring of their homes. The length of the process is very worrying, given the number of homes that are still to be connected. I have worked with an elderly vulnerable constituent who lives by herself to chase up her installation but, months in, she still does not have an appointment.
Given that I have also heard from constituents who have experienced poor communication about the RTS switch-off, there is an additional concern that some households might not even be aware that the switch-off is taking place. In fact, a poll by Age Scotland shows that nearly half the people who need their meter to be switched over are still not aware of that. It is simply not good enough. It is of great concern that people who still need to have smart meters installed face the possibility of losing hot water and heating or having their bills skyrocket to unaffordable heights.
Although technological upgrades are necessary and the switch-over will, ultimately, make bills more accurate, we must not let rural communities be left at a disadvantage. Whether we are talking about improvements to broadband or the energy systems in our homes, our rural communities are always the last to benefit from upgrades. I would be interested to hear what conversations the SNP Government has had with the UK Labour Government on the matter, with a view to ensuring that all properties will be upgraded by the deadline and that rural homes will not be left behind.
18:41
Like other members, I begin by thanking Beatrice Wishart for securing a debate on the hugely important issue of the RTS switch-off.
Members will know that energy infrastructure is reserved to the UK Government and that the actions of suppliers are regulated by Ofgem. That means that the Scottish Government has extremely limited powers to intervene, but it does not mean that we are not communicating. I have a whole page that lists the times when the Deputy First Minister, the Acting Minister for Climate Action and I have engaged with Ofgem on all the issues that have been mentioned in the debate, and we will continue to do so. I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy, who asked me to make that pledge.
I will cover some issues on which I thought that we had certainty, but I am not sure that that has been communicated, so I or Dr Allan will have to seek confirmation. We are taking the issue extremely seriously and are playing a full and proper part in raising awareness to protect households.
An issue that I did not get to in my speech is the fact that some of the remedial works are not being covered. Could the Scottish Government help with the process, given its responsibilities in relation to fuel poverty?
As I said, Ofgem is responsible for the process, and the responsibility to replace the meters lies with the energy companies. We have called for certain protections to be put in place, some of which I will outline. I hope that that will be of help to Ms Hamilton.
The number of meter upgrades that are outstanding is completely unacceptable, because Ofgem and the companies that have to replace the meters have known for years what was going to happen. We make that view clear at every opportunity. The Acting Minister for Climate Action, Alasdair Allan, wrote to the UK Government to seek penalties for suppliers that fail to replace RTS meters with fully functional or pre-programmed smart meters by June this year. I am pleased to say that Ofgem has listened and that, once refreshed licence conditions are in place, it will take compliance action against suppliers that fail to take reasonable steps to upgrade meters on time.
However, I am a little nervous, because I have heard examples of situations, including in my constituency, in which people have been unsuccessful in arranging a meter upgrade. Some people think that they have arranged an upgrade but the engineers do not turn up or, if they do, they are insufficiently trained to upgrade the meter in question. Elena Whitham gave the example of engineers turning up and being surprised by what they find in front of them and not knowing what to do. That is absolutely unacceptable. Companies must not be allowed to use the loophole of saying, “We took reasonable steps.” I heard from one person that they were on the phone, thinking that they were arranging for someone to come round to change over their meter, but, when they were asked about parking and access to their home, all of a sudden, there was a problem, because two engineers would be needed. The company said that they would phone back, but they never did. Would the reporting mechanism show that an attempt was made? An attempt was made, but the company did not phone back and the work was not done.
The Data Communications Company, or DCC, controls the digital energy infrastructure for Great Britain and it collects and shares smart meter data with energy suppliers via the wide area network, or WAN. I agree with Beatrice Wishart that it is wholly unfair that people in significant swathes of Scotland have been unable to connect to this smart meter network. We believe that penalties should also be applied to the DCC for failing to deliver coverage across every part of the country.
In my intervention on Tim Eagle, I meant to say that, for areas in Scotland that do not have coverage, we have been calling for the use of cellular technology to access the smart meter network. Christine Grahame also mentioned that in her speech. I understand from Energy UK that agreement has now been reached to allow the use of that technology, which will support many more rural and island customers to access the WAN.
Members will welcome our investment in the 4G infill programme to proactively address poor network coverage. As I mentioned in the same intervention, we have activated 55 4G masts to fill those gaps.
I am pleased that Pam Duncan-Glancy has taken part in the debate and given an urban perspective. She made the point that it is not only the areas that have connectivity problems that have an issue; there is a wider issue due to the lack of engineers going out. To my knowledge, there are no problems with digital connectivity in Glasgow, yet there are still issues with people getting smart meters installed there.
Ariane Burgess, Pam Duncan-Glancy, Emma Harper and many others mentioned that it should be a given that nobody becomes financially worse off as a result of the switch-over. I was going to say that I am pleased that our calls for suppliers to be mandated to
“take all reasonable steps to provide a tariff that leaves the consumer ‘no worse off’ than under their existing arrangement”
have been heeded. We had been told that that will happen; however, today, I am hearing from members that there is doubt about that. I will take that away and make sure that we are getting the right information. If we are getting the right information, that must be communicated to members and to the many—
Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?
Yes, I will.
In taking all reasonable steps to ensure that customers are no worse off, should there be a discount on the bill if, to use my example, white metering means that customers will pay more than they paid under the old metering system? Should there be a discount on their bill, once it has been compared with previous bills?
My reading of suppliers being mandated to
“take all reasonable steps to provide a tariff that leaves the consumer ‘no worse off’”
is that it involves exactly what Christine Grahame has just outlined. I will take away the testimony of all members today, to test it with Ofgem and suppliers.
It is also unacceptable to expect customers to pay for the expense of rewiring, which I have heard has happened in a few cases. That has not really been mentioned in the debate, but people are finding that there can be a bill associated with that. Too many consumers are already in energy and other consumer debt due to the cost of living crisis, and they should not have to deal with any additional anxieties as a result of a decision that is not theirs.
When I talked about remedial works, I meant rewiring. That is what I was talking about.
Right. Thank you.
We have asked for a fund to support consumers who are in that position, and we have called on Ofgem, the UK Government and industry to make urgent progress. Dr Allan wrote to them recently about that, but I am not entirely sure what response he has had to date. It might be in the works.
I will say a few words on resilience planning. The RTS switch-off could have a profound impact on some of our public services as well, and I reassure the Parliament that we are working across Government, and with suppliers and the regulator, to plan for any outcomes that would affect our national health service, local authorities and other public services. The Scottish Government will play its full and proper part in any resilience planning and response.
I assure members that I have heard everyone loud and clear on the confusion that still reigns about this issue. Rachael Hamilton made the absolutely fundamental point that the failure to communicate effectively has been the root of a lot of the problems. Consumers are left confused and, once they get over the confusion, they go out of their way to arrange things, but they are not being served particularly well. I will take all of that away.
Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes the debate.
Meeting closed at 18:50.Previous
Decision Time