STANDARD CONDITIONS OF LICENCES (Hansard, 16 May 1995)

§ Mr. Nigel Griffiths (Edinburgh, South)
I beg to move amendment No. 52, in page 12, line 41, at end add— '(3) Standard conditions for gas suppliers shall include a duty on licence holders to take account of the needs of low income customers in laying down methods of payment and procedures regarding debt and disconnection.'.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris)
With this, it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 53, in page 12, line 41, at end add— '(3) Standard conditions for gas suppliers shall include a duty on licence holders to provide special services including those services that must be delivered by appropriately qualified home service advisers for meeting the needs of consumers of gas conveyed through pipes who are disabled or aged 60 years and over.'.

§ Mr. Griffiths
The amendments are important because they concern the role of home service advisers who help elderly, disabled and blind people in their homes. At a face-to-face meeting, British Gas told me that it had to cut the budget in that sector to compete with the new firms that the Government seek to bring into the gas market. British Gas envisages that those firms will set low standards, so it has been forced to cut its services in line with them.
I shall spend a few moments telling the House about the people who will suffer because of those terrible cuts by British Gas. Some 18 months ago, British Gas had more 150 home service advisers, who do not only visit schools and teach children about the value of using gas wisely and safely—an issue of danger of which everyone is well aware, especially people of our parents' and grandparents' generation. More importantly, the British Gas home service advisers have developed an unique role. They visit the homes of elderly, blind and disabled people and ensure that the gas fittings are safe and easy to use.
If, for instance, by some misfortune a constituent should become blind and is a gas user, British Gas will send in a home service adviser at no cost to ensure that the appropriate Braille stickers are stuck onto the controls of the cooker to identify the grill, the oven and other parts of the cooker. For those with the misfortune to suffer from arthritis, which afflicts not just the elderly but younger people too, British Gas will send in a home service adviser with a range of adaptations to help them switch on their cooker. If it has small, fiddly knobs larger ones will be fitted so that the controls can be used more easily. If a heater cannot be operated because the control is at an awkward angle or of an awkward size so that arthritic fingers cannot grasp it, the home service adviser will adapt it as necessary.
The amendments seek to ensure that the service is not only preserved, but extended to those entering the gas market, so that new gas companies which seek to cream 181 off domestic customers cannot turn their backs on those who are elderly, disabled or blind. That is vital because British Gas has already begun the process.
Some 18 months ago, British Gas employed 136 home service advisers; now there are 78. It has reduced by about 50 the number of home service advisers so that geographical areas covering thousands of square miles of the country no longer benefit directly from that service. Last autumn, British Gas took away from Inverness, Aberdeen and the north of Scotland the only home service adviser based there. Now, if someone requests that service from British Gas, somebody from Perth, Edinburgh or Glasgow has to travel 100 or 150 miles to Inverness or to Thurso in the north of Scotland. A service that people took for granted a year ago has been cut by British Gas which told me and the Minister that it can no longer afford the £30 million to finance that and other related service.
The amendments seek to ensure that the service is restored. The cuts in Scotland from 10 home service advisers 18 months ago to four now has been universally reflected throughout the United Kingdom. There are now no home service advisers on call in many constituencies. The service may be provided after some delay. If British Gas internal papers are to be believed, it may be provided at a cost, and British Gas has floated the cost of £25 for the service. The service may be withdrawn altogether. We believe that unless it is incorporated in the Bill, we may lose that extremely valuable service. We may lose the advice and help that is given by those highly trained key staff who visit people's homes.
The Minister has already said that he wants the service protected, but under his stewardship, albeit remotely, the number of home service advisers has been cut by some 40 per cent. It is all very well for the Minister to stand at the Dispatch Box and promise us that he wants that tremendous service to continue when he has done nothing to stop British Gas cutting it to the bone.
If the Bill is left unamended, elderly, disabled and blind people will no longer be able to rely on a service that allows them to stay in their homes and that is part of community care. Until the Government insisted on further privatisation, British Gas did that job well. In the face of brutal competition, British Gas has slashed its budget and the number of home advisers.
The Minister will be hard pressed to reassure the House that he can redress the balance and ensure that the elderly, the disabled and the blind enjoy an enhanced level of service. We want a guarantee that the number of advisers will be restored to the number that existed as recently as last autumn. Unless the Minister gives that assurance, we will view all his assurances on the Bill with considerable scepticism.

§ The Minister for Industry and Energy (Mr. Tim Eggar)
The hon. Gentleman has gone in yet again for exaggerated rhetoric. It is interesting that, on the day that the right hon. Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham) has made a speech allegedly in favour of competition, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Griffiths) is claiming that the only form of competition is that which preserves in concrete the present situation. That approach is not taken by the Bill. The Government's approach is to maintain or enhance existing standards through licensing. Condition 17 of the gas suppliers licence will require licence holders to provide a series of special services on request and without charge to pensioners and the disabled. Some will require home visits.
182 There is an obligation to provide on request a free annual safety check of appliances and fittings on the customer's side of the meter. There is an obligation to provide on request a meter reading every quarter when neither the customer nor any other person living with the customer is able to read the meter. There is also an obligation to reposition gas meters. Those are three examples of visits to consumers' homes being required as a matter of practice.
As a general principle, we do not intend to require all gas suppliers to do things exactly the same as British Gas. That is the nature of competition. There may be alternative ways of providing the same or better quality services, which competitors are free to develop and from which customers could doubtless benefit.
The amendment—like so many presented by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South—seeks to make competition impossible and impracticable. The theme of the Opposition and their amendments is so to curb and confine the area in which competition can occur that there would be no competition. The amendment is the latest and most obvious example of the hon. Gentleman's contributions, and I cannot accept it.

§ Ms Ann Coffey (Stockport)
The Minister will doubtless say that the terms of amendment No. 52 are already contained in condition 19 of the standard licence. However, it states that, when customers cannot pay, the arrangements shall in relation to any of the licensee's domestic customers who through misfortune or inability to cope with credit terms for the supply of gas for domestic use incurs obligations to pay for gas for such use which he finds difficulty in discharging provide for". So, provided that that criterion is met, the supplier is obliged to consider certain arrangements for payment. It broadly continues the present arrangements for protecting consumers in debt but the phrase "misfortune or inability" is curious.
How will such a customer be distinguished? Who will make the judgment that the customer is part of the deserving poor rather than of the undeserving poor? It appears that it will be for the supplier to decide whether the consumer is a can't-payer or a won't-payer and whether the supplier has any obligation to the defaulting customer. Defaulting customers have no effective redress in disputes over their rights. If a supplier decides that a customer is not part of the deserving poor, the customer has no way of making any representations against that decision.
It is procedurally unclear who is obliged to take the initiative in bringing the appropriate arrangements into play. Will it be for the supplier to investigate or for the consumer to make his or her case when a debt has accumulated? The conditions leave it to the supplier to nominate conditions of supply, having made the judgment that an individual is part of the undeserving poor. That leaves customers with few rights. The director general would not be involved in any such disputes.
Amendment No. 52 is important in placing an obligation on the director general to make certain that the licence conditions are discharged. Perhaps the director general could intervene in disputes between suppliers and their customers over the terms on which gas is supplied. Although condition 19 is part of the social obligation, its 183 drafting is unclear. I presume that the Minister will not accept the amendment but I would like to hear his response to my comments.

§ Mr. Nigel Griffiths
I had expected the Minister to take the opportunity to persuade the House. He ducked the key issue of why it was right for British Gas to cut the number of home service advisers from 136 to 78, and he did not dwell on the valuable function performed by those advisers. The Minister commented on the lunchtime remarks by my right hon. Friend the Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham), in which I had a hand. The hon. Gentleman stated that his view of competition is not the same as ours. I say, "Hear, hear" to that. The Minister's approach is to make sure that the elderly or disabled go to the wall. That is the guiding principle of the Government of the day. If we support competition, it will not be at the cost of the poor, elderly, blind or otherwise disabled. If that is the clear blue water between Labour and the Conservative party, I am happy to be standing on this shore, not that one.