Social Security (Cold Climate Allowance) Amendment (Hansard, 25 January 1984)

§ Mr. Gordon Wilson (Dundee, East)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for more equitable heating allowances to reflect increased costs of domestic heating in colder climates; and for purposes connected therewith. Under present social security arrangements, allowances that are paid to cover heating costs are the same regardless of whether the recipient lives in Cornwall or Caithness —in other words, regardless of the severity of climate. In the wake of the blizzards which have struck Scotland and the north of England repeatedly over the past couple of weeks, while the south has escaped unscathed, it would seem redundant of me to invest too much of my energy in proving my assertion that the further north one lives the colder it becomes and, consequently, the more expensive it is to heat one's home to the same temperature. There is hard scientific evidence to prove that the further north and east one goes from the south-west of England the colder is the annual average temperature. Mainly because of that, the cost of domestic heating rises accordingly.

Professor Thomas Markus of the department of architecture and building science at Strathclyde university has had this to say: In terms of air temperatures, wind exposure, rain, and available sunshine, the Scottish climate is significantly different from the UK as a whole. The difference between the west of Scotland and the west of England is in the order of 20 per cent. (in the amount of fuel required to maintain a given house temperature). Even within Scotland, the difference between Glasgow and Aberdeen is 10 per cent. This means that for a house in Glasgow, it would require 20 per cent. more fuel to maintain a given temperature than for an identical house in Bristol. Similarly, for the same house in Aberdeen, it would require a further 10 per cent. When giving evidence to the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs on 23 March 1983, Professor Markus said: The Scottish climate is significantly more severe than the English climate even if measured by the one characteristic of air temperature. If to this is added the relative lack of sunshine during the winter months in many parts of Scotland, the higher wind speeds and the greater incidence of rain, and hence of wet walls, then the overall climatic severity is significantly higher than in England by percentages varying between 15 and 40 per cent. These significant differences are not at present taken into account in the payment of social security benefits.

Another indicator of the more severe climate in Scotland is electricity consumption. The Scottish Fuel Poverty Action Group stated: Electricity consumption in the South of Scotland Electricity Board area is 25 per cent. higher than the English average and in the hydro board area the figure is 50 per cent. The average domestic consumption of electricity in England and Wales in the year 31 March 1980 was 4,020 units per annum. The comparable figure in the South of Scotland electricity board area for the same period was 5,328 units. In the North of Scotland hydro-electricity board area, the figure was 6,678 units.

Most of the evidence is based on Scottish conditions, but I readily accept that there are gradations of temperature throughout the United Kingdom. The proposals that I am submitting will cover that. A study of the temperature statistics of the Meteorological Office's 30-year records and of isothermal charts drawn up by the Meteorological Office has enabled me to work out average annual 930 temperature belts in the United Kingdom. I shall rely on these figures when I come to explain my detailed proposals, which would ensure greater justice for those who live in colder areas.

It is a fact that fuel poverty exists and leads to hardship, hypothermia and premature death in some instances. Every year in the United Kingdom there is an unnecessary cull of the weak, the vulnerable and the aged. Among the over-60s, the death rate rises by 20 per cent. in the winter months. Among children under one year old, it rises by 40 per cent. Studies have been carried out in recent years to determine the extent of the risk of hypothermia among the aged. One such study was carried out in Glasgow in December 1980 by Dr. W. R. Primrose and Mr. L. R. N. Smith from the Govan health centre. I understand that 220 elderly patients within a practice were chosen at random and visited at home. Most of their living-room temperatures were found to be below the recommended level, which is 16 deg C. Thirty-four per cent of the sample were found to be on supplementary benefit and thereby in receipt of rent or rates rebate.

Another study entitled "Cold and Old" was carried out by Mr. Malcolm Wicks. It was observed that 9.6 per cent. of the sample were at risk of developing hypothermia. In The Observer of 16 December 1979, a former junior Minister of the DHSS, the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher), revealed that Department officials had suppressed independent research findings on the extent of hypothermia because they were politically embarrassing. The figures suggested a death rate of 35,000 old people a year from hypothermia.

The elderly are not the only group to suffer. Low-income families have to devote a much higher proportion of their household budget to fuel than average income families. In the parts of the United Kongdom which have the coldest climate, the suffering will be the more severe. It is hardly surprising that Mrs. Christine Davis, the chairman of the North of Scotland district electricity consultative council, wrote in September 1982: We have argued, and will continue to argue, that the present system, which allows the same amount of money whether you live in Torquay or Shetland, and whether you have a choice of fuels or are in an 'all-electric' home, is not helpful in the north of Scotland where the winter is longer, the weather is colder and the money, accordingly, is shorter. I turn to my proposals to deal with the problems that are faced by those living in the colder parts of the UK. Using the temperature data to which I have referred, I have divided the UK into four zones. For the exact boundaries of the zones, I have utilised regional or, in the case of England, county boundaries. Roughly speaking, the areas with an annual average temperature of less than 8.5 deg C make up zone one, the coldest zone. Zone two is based on the areas between 8.5 and 9.4 deg C, zone three from 9.5 to 10.4 deg C and zone four from 10.5 deg C upwards.

Zone one consists of the Islands councils, the Highlands, Grampian and Tayside. Zone two consists of the rest of Scotland, Northern Ireland, Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear, Durham and north Yorkshire. Zone three consists of northern England, Wales, the midlands of England and East Anglia. Zone four consists of London, the south-east and the south-west of England.

There are basically three existing fuel benefits. First, within supplementary benefit there is a notional fuel element, which in November 1983 amounted to £7.95. Secondly, within family income supplement, there is a 931 notional fuel element. Thirdly, there are additional awards that are called exceptional heating additions, which are available over and above supplementary benefit at a lower rate of £2.05 and a higher rate of £4.05. These different rates are not related to climate. I am proposing that there should be a differential payment of these fuel benefits according to climatic zones. The basic levels of payment for both notional fuel elements and heating additions should be fixed for zone four, the south of England. Those living in zone three, the midlands and Wales, would receive 10 per cent. above the basic level. Claimants living in zone two would receive 20 per cent. above the basic level and those living in the coldest zone, in the north of Scotland, would receive 30 per cent. above the basic level.

Regional variations in the payment of heating additions are nothing new. Until November 1970, they were calculated regionally on the price of coal. My scheme calls for variations that are dependent on a much more constant factor, climatic severity. For justice to be done in the United Kingdom, it is necessary for the physical factor of climate to be taken into consideration when fuel-related benefits are paid. My proposals attempt to bring in such justice and I ask the House to take a first step towards this goal by giving me leave to present the Bill.