§ 11 am
§ Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan)I am very grateful for the opportunity to debate the effects of the extreme weather conditions which prevailed over Christmas and the new year. The presence of so many Back-Bench Members in the Chamber indicates that the matter touched just about every constituency in Scotland.
Today, I shall focus attention on the response of the Scottish Office to a national emergency which demanded a nationally co-ordinated response. I think that the Opposition are united in the view that the performance of Scottish Office Ministers was inept and inadequate. That is also a common view in Scotland.
In recent years, the Scottish Office has not been a byword for speedy action and transparent accountability. That is, perhaps, a criticism that the House would expect from me. However, the whole of Scotland will wonder today why this debate on this subject is proving of so little importance to the Secretary of State for Scotland that he cannot drag himself to the Dispatch Box to consider the matter or to defend his record and the record of his ministerial team. I understand that all the other political leaders of Scotland seek to catch your eye in this debate, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We are entitled to hear a reply by the Secretary of State for Scotland. Instead, he prefers to leave his junior Minister, the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch), yet again, to carry the can for the crisis.
Clearly, we would not find on the desk of the Secretary of State the same plaque that was on Harry Truman's. For the Secretary of State, the buck clearly stops elsewhere. After hibernating during the freeze, he is now hiding from the debate. He might well hide because it is his Department that failed the people of Scotland in the recent crisis. He should, therefore, be here to answer personally for his Department's inadequacy. After all, the crisis in Scotland was his first major challenge as Secretary of State for Scotland. For the first time in the tenure of his post, there was an opportunity to show his mettle and to direct the resources available to him to do some good. At the end of 1995, the Secretary of State for Scotland was weighed in the balance and found wanting.
The Secretary of State was on holiday during the crisis. I have no doubt that it was a well-deserved holiday. It must be exhausting setting up quangos here, abolishing byelaws there, listening intently to trade unionists and councillors and generally being the caring, sharing face of Scottish Conservatism.
§ Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Port Glasgow)And then ignoring them.
§ Mr. SalmondThen ignoring them, as the hon. Gentleman says. It must he exhausting to come into the office every day in the sure and certain knowledge, as we see again from today's System 3 poll, that Scotland remains solidly against the Tories and that the impact of young Lochinvar", as Lady Thatcher once memorably described the Secretary of State, has been only to force Tory support downwards.
In my view, exhausted as the Secretary of State undoubtedly was, he had a clear obligation to return to duty over the holiday period when it was obvious that the 675 scale of the problem facing Scots in every part of our country was greater than could be imagined. There were, after all, many others—plumbers, electricity linesmen, road workers, housing officers, social workers and a huge cast of unnamed heroes—who abandoned the turkey and plum pudding to help those in trouble. They set a selfless example; that example should have been set from the very top of the Scottish Office structure.
Hon. Members may well ask what the difference would have been if the Secretary of State had taken personal charge. I suggest that the very inaction and lack of direction at the Scottish Office during the Secretary of State's absence show that it might have made a difference. I say that not with any great admiration for the Secretary of State's abilities and powers, but because in Scotland today, the only Minister with the power of initiative is the Secretary of State himself.
As well as telling us something of the calibre of the other Scottish Ministers in the dying days of this Government, that fact tells us a great deal about the way in which the Secretary of State runs his Department. Such is the centralist power of the Secretary of State and the effect of his purification of the machinery of government that without the king, the court is incapable of action. The Scottish Office was as incapable of movement as the water in the pipes of hundreds of thousands of homes across Scotland. The result was departmental inaction amid general chaos.
What did the mice do when the cat was away? The hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside, who is replying to the debate—we should give him credit for that—Wrote himself out of the script at the first opportunity. His response to an appeal to see for himself the difficulties caused by the weather was to say to the Daily Record on 4 January this year that he would
just get in the way".That might well be a sign of appealing modesty but if so, I am at a loss to understand why he should be responding for the Government in today's debate.The facts of the exceptional weather are these. From Christmas eve until at least 1 January, and later in some parts, the low temperatures experienced were exceptional. Glasgow recorded its coldest temperature ever on two successive nights—a record-breaking minus 19 deg. One highland village achieved an unofficial record of the lowest temperature ever recorded in Scotland—almost minus 32 deg. In Shetland, the deepest snowfall since the war cut off hundreds of homes and led to the constant use of an evacuation helicopter for medical emergencies.
Road safety was compromised when water and even de-icing fluid froze as it was being applied to windscreens, not just in the north, but on the M8 in the centre of Scotland. Rail travel was disrupted and some airports were closed for lengthy periods. The west and the north of Scotland were colder than Moscow, without the everyday experience of such conditions that makes life bearable and possible.
The domestic effect of those low temperatures was dramatic. In Strathclyde region alone, half a million homes were reported to have suffered burst pipes and 34,000 homes were without water. That does not take into account the rural homes in places such as Argyll where private systems were, no doubt, frozen for days on end. In Grampian, the water supply was devastated. Domestic 676 and industrial cut-offs were common and many old folk and families with young children were put in a truly desperate situation.
Those are the facts. For each individual affected, especially at the festive season, it was an unpleasant and worrying time. Yet what was the considered response of the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside? What was his ministerial summation of the situation? As he grandly claimed to the Daily Record, it was not a "major problem".
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. George Kynoch)If the hon. Gentleman is going to continue to quote a fabricated story by one Scottish newspaper, he will not make anything constructive out of the debate, which we all, I am sure, wish to try to do.
§ Mr. SalmondThe Minister will have plenty of time in which to answer. Although I do not claim that everything that appears in the press is accurate, the Daily Record seems pretty sure of the story. I hope that the Minister is taking action against the newspaper if it has misquoted him on a matter of such importance to Scotland.
I suspect that the folk memory of those patrician and patronising phrases will come to haunt the Minister for a long time. They may have the same currency as "The national health service is safe in our hands," and they may even match the prophecy by Michael Fish that there would be no hurricane. Even today, the Minister's remarks are reverberating. In another of his ill-judged comments during the crisis, he censured Grampian region for the closure of schools. It was noted in The Scotsman today that he was described yesterday in Grampian region, in a show of unity between the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Scottish National parties in that region, as a "buffoon".
Lack of water was the worst problem, which led to many people queuing in the streets with buckets. Lack of power was another major difficulty in Scotland. At Christmas time, 30,000 customers lost power in the Scottish Hydro-Electric area alone. Winds were blowing up to 115 mph. In East Lothian, gas supplies were disrupted for up to 72 hours. The state of transport meant that coal and oil deliveries were disrupted, and pressure on plumbers meant that if central heating went off, it stayed off for a long period.
§ Mr. John Home Robertson (East Lothian)I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for referring to East Lothian. While he is right to say that gas supplies were cut off for 15,000 of my constituents for up to three days, the situation was worse than that. British Gas provided some households with electric heaters to make up for the loss of their gas heating, but the surge in demand for electricity that followed resulted in the failure of the electricity supply in some streets. This has been a catastrophe for people who will have to pay enormous costs because of their burst pipes and the failure of the gas supply. British Gas TransCo is offering them £20 compensation. I hope that the hon. Gentleman agrees that that privatised utility should be required contractually to pay more compensation to all concerned.
§ Mr. SalmondI certainly agree with the hon. Gentleman. All hon. Members will agree that there can 677 be no greater criticism of British Gas than to say that that is sadly typical of its response to a whole range of situations in Scotland and elsewhere in the past few years. Hon. Members have illustrated some serious problems, but there were others.
The absence of effective cold weather payments for pensioners and those on benefit—a subject to which I shall return—meant that Scotland's winter death rate, already higher than Scandinavia's, began to rise. In some places, it was running at three times the normal rate. Hospitals have been forced to cancel hundreds of non-urgent operations because of the increased administration following the severe weather and the difficulties it caused. There is a winter crisis in Scotland's health service every year, but this year it has been much worse.
Schools were also badly affected. More than 500 were unable to open last Monday for the new session. Some children are still having to be accommodated in temporary classrooms or schools because water and other damage will take months to fix. I am sure that hon. Members from all over Scotland have their own horror stories of problems that they have encountered in their constituencies. But the overall agreement must be that this was a major national emergency that should have been dealt with—and, if possible, helped—by Government action. The conclusion that we must draw from what we have experienced in the past few weeks is that Government action was not forthcoming when necessary.
In my constituency, all of those who could help turned out to help. For example, the chaotic conditions meant that the director of housing was unable to contact the jammed lines of the local radio station. The station in my area—and others across Scotland—did a first-class job in trying to communicate information to the public. My office had to provide a means of communication between the director of housing and the local radio station. People wanted daily and, indeed, hourly information, and it was a pity that the Scottish Office did so little to co-ordinate or assist in that demand.
I accept that there are lessons to be learnt by all the agencies and services that were challenged by the difficulties and sometimes had great difficulty coping. Some of the companies will admit that they need to review their procedures and basic assumptions so that they are better able to respond if such conditions recur. I received a letter from Robert Young, chief executive of Hydro-Electric, in response to a letter that I wrote to him on Boxing day, which referred to the difficulties of answering the huge volume of calls which rained down on the company over the period.
We are told by some weather experts that we may be entering a period of more extreme weather conditions during winter and, we hope, summer. We must therefore be able to plan sensibly for the increasing vagaries of the weather, rather than always being reduced to responding to a crisis. Following the failure of the emergency systems to cope with the scale of the crisis, there may be deeper lessons to be learnt involving the historic under-investment in the utilities, which might explain why the services broke down on such a large scale in the first place.
These and other related matters require a thorough examination, and I very much welcome the decision of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee to mount an inquiry 678 into exactly what went wrong during the big freeze and what can be done about it. In response to the crisis conditions, emergency staff, the utilities, local government and voluntary workers in my view did everything that they could as soon as they could. That is not the issue at stake today. But while everyone else was doing their level best, the key ingredient—the national co-ordinating role that the Scottish Office could and should have provided—was missing.
No one denies that the severity of the weather would have led to difficulties whatever the scale and nature of the Scottish Office response, but the difficulties could have been greatly lessened if a national effort, co-ordinated by the Scottish Office and including the distribution of practical information on how to deal with the problems of frozen or burst pipes, had been made.
According to information received by my office from the Scottish Office information directorate yesterday, there exists in the files at St. Andrew's house a short public information film on how to respond to the problems caused by burst pipes. At a time when householders were struggling with frozen and burst pipes and with water running down walls and through ceilings throughout Scotland, it is outrageous that that film was not shown. Why was the film not offered for showing by national and regional television stations in Scotland? Why was appropriate audio material not provided for local radio stations to transmit? The film was not broadcast during the most severe water crisis for more than 20 years. Perhaps the Minister will tell us when he thinks it appropriate to broadcast it. Judging by the Government's incompetence, we can look forward to seeing the film in perhaps June or July.
One of my favourite childhood memories is a similar film that was frequently broadcast in the 1960s, which starred—if I remember correctly—Dr. Snoddy of "Dr. Finlay's Casebook" fame. If the Scottish Office could provide such information regularly during the 1960s, why could it not be done in the 1990s? Given the enormous public interest in the weather problems, the broadcasting media would have been extremely grateful to have received such material, and that has been confirmed by senior broadcasters.
The BBC's "Frontline Scotland" programme was so keen to track down the 1960s film starring Dr. Snoddy that it set in train a series of investigations. I can inform the House that the film was traced to a company called Water Training International at Kilwinning in Ayrshire, where it forms part of the instruction programme for the Scottish and Northern Ireland Plumbing Employers' Federation. The Minister must explain why such public information was not shown during the crisis.
Where were the full-page advertisements in newspapers providing people with practical information, such as the appropriate emergency telephone numbers to ring? Such things could and should have been done by the Scottish Office, but none was. In what I thought was a lame attempt to defend the indefensible, a Scottish Office spokesperson was reported in the Scottish Daily Mail on 16 January to have said:
News releases were constantly sent out".Freezing families and flooded-out businesses needed not Scottish Office faxes trying to put a gloss on ministerial inactivity, but practical information and co-ordinated activity.679 Even yesterday—some three weeks after the event—the Scottish Office information directorate could not provide my office with information about which Ministers were on duty on which days during the holiday period. I was incredulous when my office told me that. So that the Minister understands the difficulties that people have in getting common sense out of the Scottish Office, I shall explain what happened when my researcher contacted the Scottish Office yesterday.
My researcher called the Scottish Office four times, and was told four times that she would be called back. She was called back once. She estimated that she spent one hour being passed from staff member to staff member. Initially, she asked which Minister was on duty during the holiday period, but two press officers were unable to tell her. They said that she would be called back, but that did not happen. A second call was passed by one of the previous press officers to the press officer at the Secretary of State's department, who said that my researcher would be called back. That has not yet happened.
On her third call, my researcher tried the Scottish Office publicity section to ask about the "Keep Warm This Winter" phone line and the Scottish Office public information film. She was passed to another member of staff, who told her that no advertisement was taken out and that the Scottish Office films were 10 to 12 years old and were not being used this year. The story goes on. Can the Minister explain why, even after the event, the Department seems unable to give out information as to what he and his colleagues were doing during the crisis?
The Secretary of State, as we saw in the Scottish Grand Committee on Monday, has become rattled by the criticism that has been made by hon. Members from all parties. Perhaps that explains why he is not at the Dispatch Box today. Responding to journalists' questions earlier this month, the Secretary of State attempted to pass all responsibility for public information to local authorities. This new-found desire to extend the role of local government is somewhat surprising from a Minister who has spent most of his career trying to cut it to the bone. It is also a pathetic and evasive response. The problems that we encountered over the holiday period were national in character, not local. The newspapers and broadcasting stations which should have been targeted and provided with publicity and information extend far beyond even the largest of the local authority boundaries. Local authorities did all that they could, but there was a clear need for the Scottish Office to step in and adopt that national co-ordinating role.
To give the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside, his due, the passing of the buck to local authorities was one of the few initiatives that he took to respond to the crisis. He led his Secretary of State in that, if in nothing else. The Minister may wish to deny this also, but in the Daily Record of 4 January 1996, he said:
the current problems are the responsibility of the local authorities and, at this stage, to have a minister out and about would be irresponsible. It's my judgement that to go out and be photographed visiting affected areas would be taking up the time of people who are working to rectify the problems".That is in somewhat sharp contrast to the Secretary of State's post-match explanation on Monday, when he told the Scottish Grand Committee that Ministers were "out and about".680 I must warn the Under-Secretary that—if he is keeping an eye on his boss's opinion—his reticence seems to be out of step with another opinion which the Secretary of State gave to the Grand Committee on Monday. He said:
I take a pretty dim view of the sort of politicians who sit by their firesides and do not even get out to see what is happening on the ground".—[Official Report, Scottish Grand Committee, 15 January 1996; c. 4.]
§ Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray)My hon. Friend will recall that during the floods which hit our area of Scotland in September, the Minister was not shy about getting into a helicopter and visiting the flooded areas without even mentioning it to the local Members of Parliament, who were busy co-ordinating activities between the local authorities and others dealing with the emergency.
§ Mr. SalmondWe all remember the Minister not being backward in coming forward on that occasion. I think that it is possible to go on a fact-finding mission in order to gain a better understanding of people's problems without elaborate photo opportunities.
Apparently the buck is not to stop with the Secretary of State, for with the Under-Secretary of State. On Monday, the Secretary of State for Scotland told the Grand Committee that "the buck stops" with local authorities. It does not stop with local authorities. Scotland is saying that the Secretary of State for Scotland must accept the responsibility which goes with that office. Taking the responsibility is, or should be, his job.
If the Secretary of State has not been attending to the call of duty, what has he been doing? He has been busy pursuing his own political agenda. On 5 January, when Scotland was beginning to recover, hospitals were still under severe pressure, consumers were still without water and the extent of the problems in schools was only just being discovered, he revealed the fruits of his holiday meditation. In his first engagement after the holidays, he unveiled a political poster during a news conference and photo opportunity. He continued his attack on constitutional change. It was only then that it dawned on him that he himself was under attack, and he hurriedly arranged a visit to Strathclyde water services.
The poster is not an issue in this debate, nor is it that the Minister could not even handle its launch correctly—within four hours, it was discovered that the poster about Scottish jobs had been produced in Dublin and had to be covered up the next afternoon. What matters is the sense of priorities held by the Tories' man in Scotland—as opposed to Scotland's man in government.
The Secretary of State's actions show where his priorities are. Many Opposition Members think that there is a great deal wrong with a Scottish Office that is capable of spending public money on monitoring the media during the big freeze, but was incapable of delivering its own information to the media on how to deal with burst pipes. The Secretary of State would rather freeze comment, opinion and debate in Scotland than bring some warmth and relief to ordinary people's lives.
In my view, the moral duty of the Secretary of State and his Ministers is to resign. We cannot hold any expectation that they will volunteer to do that today, so I should like to pursue the subject of what the ministerial team could now do, after the event, to improve the position and provide redress and relief.
681 The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities estimates that the cost of weather damage to housing alone will be £25 million to £30 million. It is now proposed that there will be £16.8 million of extra borrowing consent, which fails to remedy even part of the problem, before we consider the huge bill for damaged schools and the many other costs that will accrue.
In relation to council properties, we note that the third member of the ministerial team, the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson), was anxious to duck his responsibilities and pass the buck. The Under-Secretary was caught out more quickly than the other Ministers with his ill-informed remarks about local authorities insuring their properties. After chiding them for having inadequate cover, he has been squirming because, as has been repeatedly pointed out, it was his Government who commended self-insurance to local authorities, yet the Scottish Office does not insure its own buildings. The hon. Member for Aberdeen, South nods. I am glad that he has finally realised that.
The hon. Gentleman argues that the Scottish Office should not act as an insurer of last resort for local authorities. Who is to act as the insurer of last resort for the Scottish Office? Who does he expect to pay the £5,000 bill, for example, for the Scottish Office building that was flooded in the crisis? If he remembers the previous Prime Minister's words, she said that there was no such thing as Government money, only public money. If he expects the Scottish Office to be treated in that way, why does he not understand the plight of local authorities in a national emergency?
Today I ask the Ministers for a clear, unambiguous statement on financial compensation. I ask them not to dodge the issue or appeal to the principle of self-help, which they so lamentably failed to observe themselves. Will they tell us what measures will be put in place, and when, and whether proper and adequate financial compensation will be forthcoming for those local authorities? At one time during the emergency, the Minister praised them for the work which they were doing.
The extremely cold conditions in Scotland this year also brought into sharp relief the country's prevailing climatic conditions. Even in a normal winter, Scotland is a cold place where many people experience great difficulties. In a land of energy plenty, the problem of fuel poverty affects 800,000 households. Even in a normal winter, 3,000 people die of cold-related illnesses in Scotland each and every year.
The incidence of winter deaths is greater in Scotland than in Scandinavia, which has a more severe climate. Last year, during a relatively mild winter, 239 Scots died of hypothermia. That is a damning indictment of the amount of support provided to those people by the Government. Instead of a ramshackle cold weather payment system, what is needed is a guaranteed cold weather allowance for pensioners and others on benefit throughout the winter months. The SNP believes that that can be achieved in the context of an independent Scotland. We propose automatic payment to those in need throughout the winter of sums ranging from £7.40 to £11.15 a week. The total cost of such a system would be £170 million per annum, less than 6 per cent. of this year's estimated revenues from the North sea. Other 682 countries, such as Ireland, already have such a system. It is a disgrace that an energy-rich country such as Scotland does not. We must end the scandal of fuel poverty amid energy plenty in Scotland.
I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Member for Moray (Mrs. Ewing) was successful in queuing for a ten-minute Bill last night. Therefore, the House will soon have another opportunity to debate the important issue of cold weather payments. It is not just the SNP which commends that to the House. Every pensioner and benefit claimant in Scotland, all of whom have experienced at first hand in recent weeks the effect of our climate, will want to see that measure given broad support.
The extreme weather conditions over the holiday period in Scotland were a natural phenomenon. We cannot avoid such crises, but we can act effectively to overcome the worst effects of them. The Scottish Office, led by the Secretary of State and staffed by his colleagues, failed to act. In my view, they were in dereliction of their duty. No one perhaps can be surprised at yet another failure by Tory Ministers. That is why this governing party commands the support of one in 10 of the Scottish population. This year's big freeze provides Scotland with yet another example of how badly governed Scotland is within the context of the Union. Even within my admittedly pessimistic view of how the structures of government operate for Scotland, in this debate we will hear that the experience of the big freeze provided something which was worse even than our lowest expectations. We want and need explanations, and we should have resignations and apologies. I hope that we will have no more bluff and bluster, and no more excuses and piling the blame on everyone except those who have clear responsibilities to lead and to act.
At the very least, we should receive a clear undertaking that in future there will be a clear recognition that the primary role of the Scottish Office is not as a ministry of propaganda and photo opportunities, but as a department of public information and public service. That is what Scotland has the right to expect, and it is a measure of the ultimate failure of the Government and the ministerial team that today we have to demand it once again.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris)Before I call the next speaker, I remind the House that we have 35 minutes before the closing speeches. Obviously, a fair number of hon. Members wish to contribute, so I make an appeal for some short speeches.
§ Mr. Bill Walker (North Tayside)I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) on obtaining it. I was saddened by his speech, because we could learn so much from the experience that we all had. We could have learnt lessons that would make positive contributions towards dealing with people's problems.
One of the comments made by the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan shows clearly that he missed the opportunity to learn from the events. He sweepingly mentioned pensioners in Scotland. I am a pensioner and I have no intention of accepting public money for freezing conditions. Unlike others, I do not think that all pensioners need such assistance and support.
683 I live in probably the most modern house erected in a long time. It was built to the highest specifications laid down for United Kingdom building, yet I suffered five bursts in the main pipes serving the upstairs radiators of that modern house, which is only a few months old. Those five bursts show that the conditions were unique. One lesson that can be learnt is that, obviously, the highest standards laid down today for building in Scotland are not adequate for the conditions that we may meet.
I say "may meet" because I remember vividly the freeze of 1946-47, which the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan probably does not. I was in the Royal Air Force and every station was closed down. We were sent home because we could not heat the billets and the messes. I also vividly remember the conditions in the freeze of the 1960s and, again, I was in the Royal Air Force. The hon. Gentleman must realise that some of us have been down this road before.
I have seen the film that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. If that film had been shown on television, he would have chastised my hon. Friend the Minister for showing an out-of-date and irrelevant film.
I am not opposed to national activity to help cope with such situations as the cold weather caused. I welcome the fact that the Scottish Select Committee will look into the matter. Members of the Scottish Select Committee who are here will know that, on Monday, I suggested that that inquiry should have a very narrow remit and know exactly what it is doing. In that way, we can produce a report that will concentrate on suggesting solutions to the problem, and not on attacking individuals.
Like the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan, I wish to place on record my thanks to my local authority, which responded marvellously. I also thank Scottish Hydro-Electric, which in my area responded magnificently, the water authorities and British Gas. The people on duty while others were on holiday did a remarkable job in the most severe conditions that one could expect. That does not mean that lessons cannot be learnt, because they can always be learnt.
We should not be carried away by scandalised reports in a Scottish newspaper. If we were to believe some of the stuff in the papers, few of us would be here doing a worthwhile job, because hon. Members from all parties have been on the receiving end of stories in the papers at some time. Newspapers often use a story to create an issue with little regard for the truth.
The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan mentioned insurance. In Strathclyde, where the local authority paid to insure its buildings and schools, how will the people feel if they are asked to pay to bail out local authorities that did not insure themselves? That is what devolution means—giving authority to people at local level to make judgments, right or wrong.
We can learn another lesson from the events. The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan suggested that Strathclyde should be made to pay for somebody else's decision. That is wrong. If one authority decides to carry the risk—because that is what it is—and another authority decides to pay for insurance, why should the authority that has paid bail out the other?
The difference between the Scottish Office and local government is that all Government Departments are paid for by all taxpayers. One group of taxpayers is not given benefits over others, and the hon. Member for Banff and 684 Buchan failed to take note of that. When one local authority decides that it is not going to take out insurance cover, it should make that clear. It should tell the people that it is offering a council tax lower than it would be—or should be—if it took out insurance cover. Then the local people would know that, in the event of another episode of severe weather—which seems to occur about every 20 years—they would have to pick up the tab. That is real local decision making, and the hon. Gentleman got it wrong. He should not suggest something that will disadvantage one group of Scots against another.
There are lessons to be learnt from this episode. I have taken note of what you said, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I shall stop now. If the Scottish Select Committee can produce a helpful report and the Government can respond quickly, we might learn some positive lessons, but we shall get nowhere by attacking personalities.
§ Mr. David Marshall (Glasgow, Shettleston)As one of many hon. Members who applied for a debate on this important subject but who was unsuccessful in the ballot, I congratulate the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) on his good luck. I also thank him for allowing time for other hon. Members to participate, and I shall be brief.
Over the festive season, Scotland had not just severe weather, but exceptionally severe weather. Record low temperatures were established and the country had never known weather like it since record keeping started. The whole country was affected, but Glasgow suffered especially. For several days, it was one of the coldest cities in the world. Temperatures were recorded of minus 20 deg and even lower. Such freezing weather could not have been foreseen and nothing could have been done in advance to cope with the situation.
I wish to tell the House just how badly Glasgow's housing stock was hit by the weather. I am grateful to Mrs. Margaret Vass, the head of development for Glasgow city council, for some statistics for the period from 23 December to 11 January. During that time, 42,910 emergency repair requests were issued as a result of the severe frost and the subsequent thaw. In a normal winter, the number of such repair requests is around 2,000. Sometimes more than one request was made for the same houses because they had burst pipes on several different days, but about 25,000 council houses were affected, plus several thousand other houses in the city. Over 2,000 of them were in the east end of Glasgow and in my constituency.
I am glad to say that of the total number of necessary repairs reported, City Build has completed about 31,000—a remarkable record in such a short space of time. Of the outstanding repairs, about 9,500 relate to high-cost emergency reinstatement—work estimated to cost £5.5 million. The estimated provisional cost to the council for turning off water and for repairing burst pipes is £2.5 million, to repair major damage, £5.5 million, to pay for staff overtime, £150,000, for emergency equipment, £60,000, for temporary flats being refurnished and repaired, £450,000, for bed-and-breakfast accommodation, £50,000 and for lost rents, £400,000. That adds up to a grand total of £9.11 million. Those costs may vary, but if anything, they are likely to increase before the final figure is known. I suggest that a sum of £10 million is much more likely.
685 Just in case anyone thinks that those costs are excessive, it should be borne in mind that 25,000 houses and possibly 50,000 people or more were affected, and that more than 1,000 families had to leave their homes and be put up in temporary accommodation by the council. That does not include the many thousands who left their homes and went to live with relatives and friends, before being able to return home once repairs had been carried out. Moreover, many of the days involved were public holidays, which incurred additional expenditure and caused more difficulties.
Perhaps one of the saddest aspects of the results of the freeze will be the delays to other much needed projects and normal repairs—to housing improvements and modernisation, and to other capital projects. Everything will be slowed down now and people will suffer for months and possibly years to come.
Glasgow has seen nothing like this weather in living memory. Like other hon. Members, I pay tribute to everyone who helped in the crisis: the plumbers and tradesmen who worked day and night, the water, gas and electricity workers, the Army who helped to provide emergency water supplies in parts of the city, Clyde Action, and Radio Clyde, which set up a special freeze line that helped many people when they needed it most. I also thank all the volunteers who helped others, Strathclyde regional council and social work department, Glasgow district council, and the city's housing department and City Build. Those last two departments are much more used to criticism than to praise, but on this occasion they did a magnificent job, keeping offices and depots open at all hours through holidays and weekends. Staff did all they could to cope with the crisis.
It is always invidious to single out individuals for praise because some who deserve it more than others may be missed out. My constituency includes a higher than average number of elderly and vulnerable people and of the unemployed and people on low incomes. Rosemary Hendry and Dave Hanratty of the Whiterose tenant management co-operative in the Parkhead area of the city opened their community hall and cared for 15 families at a time. They put in beds and fed and looked after those people, who ranged from babies to an old woman of nearly 80. They certainly did a tremendous job. Frank Kelly co-ordinated efforts in Barrowfield, which was particularly hard hit by the effects of the weather.
There were many similar examples throughout the city and doubtless throughout Scotland of people helping others. Their efforts are to be contrasted with the lack of effort on the part of the Government—particularly the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch), the miscalled Minister responsible for industry and local government. He is quoted as having complained that it was his day off: he was not, he said, the duty Minister. It seemed that he was content to sit on his backside at home in front of the fire. No wonder the Daily Record described him on its front page as "A big drip". I do not like criticising other Members, but this time I feel that the Minister's actions left a great deal to be desired. He should have done much more to deal with the crisis.
The Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Scotland have it all wrong. In replies to my written questions, they both refused to visit the hardest hit areas 686 and chose instead to concentrate on water supplies. But the problem is not about water supplies; it is about restoring people's homes so that they can get back to normality. The Government seem more worried about the loss of water than about the loss of accommodation.
There have already been references to the insurance problems. It is estimated that almost half the tenants affected in Glasgow had no contents insurance. Before Conservative Members tell me that that was their own fault, I might point out that insurance costs are high. People who are unemployed or on low incomes but who have families to look after and must choose between paying for insurance or feeding their kids will inevitably choose to feed the kids: it is no contest. Many people have no insurance, not because they do not want it, but because they cannot afford it. Poverty is a terrible thing and the city of Glasgow is full of it.
The supreme irony is that while people were losing all their possessions and were in the depths of despair, the rollover jackpot in the national lottery rose to £42 million, with record profits being made for the company. There must be some way of devoting some of the money raised by such schemes to good causes such as helping people when they most need help. Who can think of a better good cause? I can think of none. I do not see why there cannot be a special fund to use some of the money thus generated to help people who have lost everything.
As far as I am aware, the Department of Social Security and the Benefits Agency are not giving grants to people who have suffered loss; they are giving them loans. But people who could afford to pay off loans at £8 or £10 a week would not need the loans in the first place—they could go out and buy replacements for what they had lost. I therefore hope that the Secretary of State and the Cabinet will argue for additional money to be given to local Benefits Agency offices, so that they can give people grants to buy bedding, clothing, cooking equipment and the other essentials of daily life that they have lost because their ceilings have collapsed or their pipes have burst.
The Minister must seriously consider the hardship suffered by people throughout Scotland and must do all that he can to help local authorities by giving them additional resources. Let him do that and earn, for once, the gratitude of i11 the victims of this disaster.
§ Mr. James Wallace (Orkney and Shetland)Hon. Members will recall that when the news about the bad weather broke, it tended to focus at first on my constituency, which between Christmas eve and new year's day experienced some of the heaviest snowfalls in memory, with drifts of up to 30 ft reported in places. I shall not indulge in semantic arguments about when a state of emergency is a state of emergency. Let us be clear, however: these were exceptional circumstances, which rightly prompted Shetland Islands council to activate its emergency response plan. It would appear that it proceeded to co-ordinate the various services remarkably well.
Obviously, people wanted the roads cleared sooner than they were, but we should not underestimate the size of the task. Besides road clearance, important work was done by the social work department, which concentrated on providing help for the vulnerable and the elderly. Fine work 687 was also done by the health board—by nurses, doctors and district nurses, who kept the health service going, ably supported by the helicopter services of the coastguard. BBC Radio Shetland came back on air between Christmas and new year and provided an important flow of information. The people themselves were responsible for many acts of neighbourliness and showed their resilience in coping with the exceptional weather.
It would be churlish not to acknowledge the response by the Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch), who made it clear that Government resources were available, including military resources which were under review at the time and which were thought not to be necessary. As acknowledged in the local press, he was in regular contact with the islands council and no doubt put his knowledge of the islands to good use, making it quite clear throughout the period that the appropriate Government assistance would be available if required.
Obviously, I know more about my own constituency than about any other, but my hon. Friend the Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) has lent me a series of press releases relating to water supplies, issued by Grampian regional council. They show just how much activity there was trying to cope with the disaster. It is important not to lose sight of the people who did remarkable work to restore vital services.
§ Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Cromarty and Skye)Will my hon. Friend confirm that although there has been some controversy, particularly in the Western Isles, the individuals who performed heroically included local representatives of Scottish Hydro-Electric? Does he agree that, when we and our hon. Friends had the opportunity of a discussion with the chairman and chief executive of that company last week, we learnt of an important subsequent development? They are considering an improved communications system between the central offices in Perth and the outlying areas, to ensure a better flow of information in both directions on instances of power failure and—equally important, if not more so—the restoration of power supplies.
§ Mr. WallaceI agree with my hon. Friend on both points. I certainly agree about the work done by individual linesmen and the subsequent response of the chairman and chief executive of Scottish Hydro-Electric.
In circumstances such as this, there is a constant temptation to blame someone. We seem to have got ourselves into the situation in which everything is someone's fault. We blame Scottish Hydro-Electric, the Government, local government or whatever. In the immediate aftermath, the Secretary of State and his Ministers got their priorities wrong—to unveil a poster campaign against the plans of the Scottish Constitutional Convention was completely the wrong set of priorities.
Equally, although I have praised the Under-Secretary of State, he was wrong to blame Grampian region for closing schools for an extra day. Today's edition of The Scotsman states that the chairman of the education committee
said that Mr. Kynoch's remarks had 'demolished the morale' of council employees working flat out to cope with the crisis.Obviously, in exceptional weather conditions mistakes will be made. We are all very good at the perfection of hindsight. In the midst of trying to cope, people will inevitably make mistakes. The weather was exceptional 688 and party colleagues to whom I have spoken in Glasgow—perhaps hon. Members representing Glasgow can confirm this—said that it was a very dry cold and that people might not have recognised just how low the temperature had plummeted. As a result, precautions might not have been taken.Recriminations do not always help. The real blame will lie if lessons are not learnt, and we must see where they can be learnt. There will be lessons to be learnt with regard to what the Government can do and their role in public information. Having said that, however, I am not sure whether the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) saw what his local council did—it inserted a full half-page advertisement in The Aberdeen Press and Journal on 3 January, which went to considerable lengths to advise water customers.
§ Mr. SalmondThat is the point.
§ Mr. WallaceThe hon. Gentleman says that that is exactly the point, but perhaps a clear idea of the responsibilities of local and of national Government is required. If local government is providing the information, I am not sure that there is a case for national Government repeating it. There must be clear demarcation lines as to who is responsible and, if necessary, we must make sure that the financial resources are there to ensure that it is done.
The hon. Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr. Marshall) rightly identified the fact that we are talking about many people's homes and households. I hope that central Government will respond to the problems that the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities brought to the attention of the Minister responsible for housing—the scale of the damage to the public housing stock. We are talking about people's homes. It is an immediate problem and the debate should not be protracted over a considerable time.
Local authorities should be examining their emergency plans to find out whether they can be improved. With the advent of the water authorities after April, it will be important to ensure proper co-ordination between them and the local authorities. One complaint, particularly in Grampian, is that while it is accepted that the statutory and prime responsibility is to reconnect domestic supplies—quite rightly—efforts should be made to ensure that industrial users are not disconnected for as long as they were on this occasion.
Scottish Hydro-Electric was another target, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Cromarty and Skye (Mr. Kennedy) pointed out, the linesmen responded well. My hon. Friend the Member for Gordon reminded me that, in 1984 when there was heavy snow in his constituency, 20,000 people were cut off for two weeks. I suspect that lessons have been learnt from that exercise because there was nothing on quite that scale on this occasion. That does not mean that people should become complacent. The meeting to which my hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Cromarty and Skye referred was very constructive, with Scottish Hydro-Electric identifying the fact that its communications were far from adequate and that there is a greater need to ensure a better flow of information to and from customers who are cut off and who want to know when they will be reconnected. The company also accepted that much more could be done to improve the helicopter operation in Shetland to get heavy lifting gear in place, particularly when areas are cut off because of the snow.
689 As individuals, we also must consider what we can learn from such experiences. One of the problems is that we all have greater expectations, and there is nothing wrong with that—it prompts Governments and companies such as Scottish Hydro-Electric to provide a better service—but we should not always take things for granted. If our houses are all-electric, we must face up to the fact that there might be times of the year when alternative sources of energy must be available.
On insurance, I echo a point made by the hon. Member for Shettleston. Income support levels do not take into account the payment of any element as a premium for insurance. If the Government are not the insurer of last resort and if people have to pay for insurance, will the Minister point out to his colleagues in the Department of Social Security that they must have the resources to allow them to pay insurance premiums? As the hon. Gentleman said, I suspect that if the choice is between food and an insurance premium, one will buy food. At the moment, such premiums are not included in the calculation.
People must also be able properly to identify what to expect from the authorities. The Shetland Islands council was asked at one stage to provide disposable nappies, which is not the responsibility of local government. We must tackle our own individual responsibilities.
Many lessons must be learnt and, as there may yet be more cold spells this winter, they must be learnt immediately. If they are not and there are more such failures of supply, the scope for recrimination will be much greater than it was for what was an exceptional period of cold weather over Christmas and the new year.
§ Mr. Mike Watson (Glasgow, Central)I do not think that it is necessarily important to apportion blame for any aspect of what happened due to the severe cold weather. It is much more important to look ahead and ask how we can deal with the problems that have been shown to result from such severe weather.
My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr. Marshall) eruditely outlined the situation in Glasgow in its widest context. As he said, many of the problems are poverty related. I want to concentrate on health service provision. The crisis in the past few weeks graphically highlighted the fact that the national health service in Scotland is simply unable to cope with the demands placed on it today, irrespective of severe weather. The reduction in the number of beds in recent years, particularly in Glasgow, and the lack of proper central planning following the introduction of an internal market within the NHS have left it unable to cope and to respond flexibly to the demands put on it.
Last week, I was faced with a ridiculous situation in two of the acute hospitals in my constituency. Glasgow royal infirmary had bodies piled high in rooms that were not mortuaries. They were left there for days because the hospital could not cope with the demand, and that was not entirely due to the freeze and to the fact that there could be no burials. The system was unable to cope with the severe numbers.
Clearly, severe cold means that more people, particularly the elderly, die and we accept that. Hypothermia is a serious aspect of the problem, but none 690 the less Glasgow royal infirmary, which is perhaps the major hospital in Scotland, was unable to cope with the demands placed upon it and to provide the sort of service for which we have all been paying over the years and which we are entitled to expect.
The lack of flexibility was also shown at Victoria infirmary, which is also in my constituency. When I visited that hospital last week to discuss with management the problems that had resulted, it was interesting to note that no women were being referred there as emergency cases by general practitioners and ambulances, as the hospital had no women's emergency beds left. They had to be ferried onwards to the Southern General, if they could be accommodated there. They were shunted round the city at a time of great need. The management made it clear to me that the crisis had resulted not from the freeze-up or from staff illnesses, although they were contributory factors, but from the fact that the system simply did not provide sufficient beds to deal with the number of cases that were being referred to the hospital.
Obviously, the cold weather caused problems at Victoria infirmary. I understand that there were 83 deaths, mainly of elderly people, at Christmas and the new year, compared with 27 in the same period last year, but it was stressed that the system was not sufficiently flexible and had no slack to take account of extremities in the weather. There were also problems in the summer during the heatwave.
Almost 1,000 elective surgical operations had to be postponed during the crisis. All the patients who required non-urgent surgery did not get their operations. That sums up what is happening in the health service. It cannot cope with the demands that are placed upon it. By all accounts, the position in England, particularly in London, is even worse, but that is no consolation to those of us in Scotland who fought to preserve a health service to provide care at a time of need, free of charge and within a reasonable response time.
I am particularly concerned by newspaper reports in the past couple of days that Victoria infirmary is considering contracting out another 500 jobs and perhaps losing its auxiliary nursing service. The shortage of auxiliary nurses in the new year meant that some operations had to be postponed.
I conclude by 'quoting Matthew Dunnigan, a consultant at Stobhill hospital, who had warned the Government in the past. After the events of the past few weeks, he said:
You have to look at your needs in terms of coping with peak demand. That is something that is understood by people who run trains and buses, but not, apparently, by those who run the health service…but the Scottish Office are sticking to this aim of reducing beds by 5,000 before the year 2000.
§ The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton)Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
§ Mr. WatsonI am sorry, but I have no time. I am sure that the Under-Secretary can cover those points in his reply to the debate.
We must completely reassess the number of beds in Scotland. I call on the Government to introduce a moratorium—a freeze on any further bed closures—until the whole picture has been considered in the light of the events of the past month—
§ Dr. GodmanIn Inverclyde as well.
§ Mr. WatsonYes—in Inverclyde and in other parts of Scotland. We must make absolutely sure that the health service can provide the services that the people of Scotland are entitled to expect and for which they have paid.
§ 12.1 pm
§ Mr. Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh, Leith)As someone who applied for a debate on this subject, I congratulate the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) on his success in the ballot, and thank him for allowing me to contribute.
I was perturbed at Hogmanay when a constituent rang me from the royal infirmary saying that water had been cut off in many wards. I telephoned the hospital and spoke to the director of water and drainage. Water was provided by the fire brigade on a temporary basis, but there was still rationing for several days. There should be emergency cover for hospitals in those circumstances.
My main concern is my constituents who were affected by burst pipes in their houses. Many of them do not have insurance. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr. Marshall) that some Government money should be made available to them. I note that a written answer last week referred to loans and grants. Will the Minister please explain who is getting grants? I hope they will be widely available to poor constituents who cannot afford insurance, especially since the Government increased insurance tax last year.
There has been considerable damage to the fabric of houses. Edinburgh district council will have to spend £5 million to repair the damage to its housing stock. If no Government assistance is available, that will mean a rent increase of more than £3, in addition to the £3 increase that will be necessary in any case because Edinburgh, like many other places, receives no housing support grant.
The Minister may refer to the Bellwin formula. How much will that involve for Edinburgh, and how long will it take? I understand that, when it was applied in Perth recently, there was a delay of 18 months. That is not good enough for tenants in Edinburgh, who cannot possibly afford a £6 rent increase next year.
Finally, I have noticed that the council houses most affected in my constituency are those that have not been modernised. Those with central heating systems and lagged pipes were generally unaffected. That is yet another reason why the Government should not carry out the madness of slashing housing budgets next year. Warm homes can provide protection against damage for many tenants—and if the Minister is fed up with me going on about the cuts to the housing budget, he ain't heard nothing yet.
§ 12.4 pm
§ Mr. George Robertson (Hamilton)I very much regret that my hon. Friends have been squeezed out of the debate. I welcome the debate, but it is far from sufficient to deal with a national emergency that should have had national co-ordination. Frankly, it should not have been a matter of the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) being lucky enough in the lottery for Adjournment debates and to raise such a serious issue. I very much regret that my hon. Friends the Members for 692 Western Isles (Mr. Macdonald), for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson) and for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) were unable to make important constituency points that should have been raised in the debate.
There should have been an oral statement to the House last Tuesday, and the fact that one was not made is deplorable. On such an important occasion, when we are debating a matter that affects so many thousands of citizens in Scotland, it is quite unacceptable that the Secretary of State for Scotland could not find time to answer the debate.
In Edinburgh on Monday, the Secretary of State for Scotland made snide comments about the fact that I did not speak in the debate on law and order. When I asked him whether he intended to speak at every debate in the Grand Committee, he said that he would speak on every important issue. However, he is not here today, and the people of Scotland will reach their own conclusions about his priorities.
Despite the parrot cries of somebody who says and thinks that he is a Minister of the Crown, I intend to be constructive in the debate and to put the role of the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson), into perspective. Perhaps he should heed the advice of his fellow Ministers and remain quiet for the rest of the debate.
I shall concentrate on what needs to be done now to help councils and citizens in Scotland. Ministers have an opportunity to redeem themselves, and perhaps to give a lead on what can be done.
I begin by commending and congratulating the hundreds of public service workers in local councils and the public utilities, who gave up their holidays and left their homes to assist in dealing with the effects of the weather in Scotland over Christmas and the new year. No one who saw them on television, spoke to the countless numbers of Hydro-Electric and Scottish Power workers who recovered power to homes or saw the work of road clearers, transport workers, hospital, water and social workers, social security office workers and Scottish Office officials could be anything other than impressed by their real commitment to public service—which it is all too easy for Conservative Members to denigrate when it suits them.
The national emergency in Scotland was quite unprecedented in climatic terms. It deserved a response on a national basis and national co-ordination, and it is regrettable we did not get that. It is not good enough for the emperors of the Scottish Office to say that the buck stops with the local councils. They have the power, the control and the money, and it was their responsibility to take in hand what everyone regarded as an emergency.
It is rich to hear Conservative Members and Ministers complaining about scandalous and inaccurate treatment by the media. When the Daily Record ran an article about the Minister responsible for industry, whatever he has to say and plead today, and whatever wriggling excuses he has to put forward, that newspaper spoke for Scotland in the midst of a national emergency that affected so many Scottish people. It deserves commendation rather than denigration from Conservative Members. To blame school janitors for part of the problem is to stoop to desperate levels.
693 The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Wallace), with his usual reasonableness, said that the Secretary of State committed an error of judgment on his first day back at work after a well-deserved holiday, when his priority was to unveil a propaganda poster rather than deal with the problems affecting the people of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman was a little too reasonable. The Secretary of State's behaviour was a spectacular display of indifference and cynicism, given all that we knew of the experience of people in Scotland. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman's 11 per cent. rating in today's opinion poll reflects the conclusion of the Scottish people.
Many Scottish authorities did that which the Scottish Office information department should have been asked to do—mount a serious campaign. The new shadow authority for South Lanarkshire, which is my own authority, widely publicised emergency telephone numbers that were called by people as far away as Shetland who were desperate for information about the crisis.
The heating bills that the public will receive over the next few weeks will be a nightmare for many of them. It was clear to many householders that the only way to protect their property was to turn up their heating to a level that they probably could not afford. In the next few weeks, bills will pop through letter boxes throughout Scotland, creating serious financial difficulty for many of the people who receive them.
Every one of those bills will include 8 per cent. value added tax. I hope that people in Scotland will remember that if Ministers had had their way, and had not been stopped in the House by a Labour-initiated campaign, 15.5 per cent. VAT would have been added to their heating bills. [HON. MEMBERS: "It would have been 17.5 per cent."] I was too reasonable to the Government for a moment, but that will not last.
It is not that long since the last, supposedly election-winning Budget was out of the way. Deep in its small print was a cut in home energy efficiency schemes, which have done so much to help people in Scotland to deal with severe weather. A sum of £3.1 million was taken out of those schemes, under which 200,000 Scottish homes have been insulated—but 20,000 will now be denied the help that was to be available. Building industry installers who planned according to Government promises have discovered yet again that a Tory promise is virtually worthless. That was a mean cut, especially in the circumstances in which people find themselves today. It was scandalous.
What can the Government do to help? How can the Minister redeem himself and the Government's reputation? [HON. MEMBERS: "He cannot."] He can and he should, and he has that opportunity today. Councils are crying out for help. The scale of the damage is massive. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities says that Scottish councils face bills of between £25 million and £30 million, in addition to their planned or forecast winter expenditure, to repair council houses.
That figure does not take into account schools and other properties damaged by burst pipes, which will probably double the estimate. Strathclyde regional council suggests that school repairs and extra staffing costs could involve expenditure as high as £12 million.
694 Councils are strapped for cash. The financial settlement announced recently is still being pored over by many councils and leaves them no room for manoeuvre, yet in 11 weeks' time the new unitary authorities are expected to be up and running. It is in no way reasonable to expect them to cope not only with the new challenges and costs of reorganisation but with the additional expense caused by the winter conditions.
I am acutely conscious that there is no pot of gold waiting to be thrown at Scotland's councils or the many people who need help, but central Government have the resources. There is a contingency reserve for precisely such situations. It is important to establish as quickly as possible how much money is available and how much is needed to help local councils, and how generous the Government will be. We expect the Minister to address that priority when he replies.
A letter from the Secretary of State for Scotland to his fellow Thatcherite who heads the Department of Social Security is not sufficient to deal with the misery and hardship that will be caused to many poor people throughout Scotland. The Benefits Agency has been inundated with demands for help. As my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Chisholm) said, only loans have been given—not grants, which could have made a difference.
More resources must be devoted to the problem, so that the public will not have to continue enduring the misery from which they suffer at present. The Department of Social Security and the Benefits Agency need help, and they need it now. Scotland must learn, and learn quickly, from the lessons of this disaster. I am glad that the Scottish Affairs Select Committee has taken on board an emergency investigation. The priority is to assist local authorities to repair the damage caused. I hope that today's debate will allow them to get on with that important task.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. George Kynoch)I join in congratulating the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) on securing this Adjournment debate, but that is probably all on which I will congratulate him. I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond on the Government's behalf to this interesting debate. The many good contributions have generally recognised the significant efforts made by many people during a period of severe cold weather.
The hon. Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr. Marshall) spoke about housing problems and insurance, to which I hope to refer later. The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Wallace), whose remarks I welcome, is aware of the communication links that were regularly provided between central and local government. I am grateful also for the hon. Gentleman's recognition that we must learn, so as to do things better in future.
My hon. Friend the Member for North Tayside (Mr. Walker) gave one of his usual positive and pragmatic speeches. He clearly understands the realities of difficult situations. He believes not in knocking but in being constructive and finding ways forward. I welcomed his contribution.
The hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) spoke about the assistance sought by local authorities, and the Bellwin formula. It is up to local authorities to prepare details of their costs. I will refer to that aspect later.
695 I assure all hon. Members that the Government fully appreciate the concerns and distress produced by a dreadful combination of severe weather, starting in Shetland over Christmas and spreading to the whole country over the Hogmanay period. I join my hon. Friend the Member for North Tayside in commending the many people in power companies, local authorities and emergency services, whose unstinting efforts over the holiday period helped to restore essential services as quickly as weather conditions allowed. They were the most severe encountered since 1963—the most severe weather before then being in 1947.
The penetrating frost between 27 and 30 December caused many parts of plumbing systems within domestic and commercial premises—I stress commercial premises—to freeze. That is not surprising, given the record low temperatures. The consequences were exacerbated by the holiday period. That factor had a marked effect, especially on industrial and commercial premises. Many domestic, commercial and industrial premises were unoccupied, with heating systems set at low levels. In some instances, those systems were switched off.
Commonsense precautions for individuals and businesses could well have had a beneficial effect in reducing some of the problems. The recent mild winters have perhaps lulled people into a false sense of security about severe weather and led them to omit some of the basic steps that I remember were taken in my youth, such as draining systems that might otherwise be unprotected from frost over the holiday closedown.
I can remember that we regularly used to shut down the water supply in the factory. The sprinkler system, which was there to protect against fire by insurance demand, was changed to a compressed air system during frosty weather. Perhaps we have been lulled into forgetting about severe conditions. It is more than 20 years since there have been frosts approaching the severity of those of the recent past.
The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan referred to a Central Office of Information film, which was produced about 12 years ago. My hon. Friend the Member for North Tayside rightly said that since then conditions have changed significantly, including the insulation of properties, and that the film is no longer in date.
I hope that, when the review body that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has announced comes to consider the lessons that can be learnt, it will take into account specifically communications, and the warnings that can be given to the general public. My right hon. Friend has said that we could seriously consider producing an updated film if the media were to revert to previous practice and regularly showed such films.
Responsibility for emergency planning lies with regional authorities—of that there is little doubt. Throughout the period that we are discussing, however, my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Scottish Office team have been in steady and regular contact, through the emergency planning section in the Scottish Office, with all the local authorities.
The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland referred to a typical contact that we had with a local authority. We asked the authority whether it needed assistance, and if so what assistance. The military was one option. Throughout, no local authority asked for assistance. I would argue that no authority needed assistance because they were coping so admirably.
696 Water authorities, of course, have well-established procedures for dealing with burst mains. Generally, authorities mobilised their repair squads quickly as soon as the situation developed, and were usually able to effect repairs to damaged pipes, and restore supply, within 24 hours of a burst being detected.
The authorities' chief concern was the consequences of the massive loss of water through burst pipes, not in their mains but in customers' plumbing systems when the thaw arrived. We know that the thaw was dramatically quick. Overnight flow rates trebled and remained at more than 150 per cent. of normal demand for several days.
Levels in reservoirs, as I heard and saw in Grampian, fell rapidly, and the minimum pressure necessary to maintain supplies to all consumers could not be sustained in some areas. Inevitably, properties in elevated positions, or those at the end of systems or close to a major burst, were most affected.
When I visited the operational headquarters in Grampian, I was told about one industrial leakage that was the equivalent of the normal consumption of about 7,000 houses. That is why the water authorities cut off industrial premises, which were largely closed. When work resumed after the Christmas-new year period, the water supply was restored as quickly as possible. Massive industrial leakages were a major problem for water authorities.
§ Mr. SalmondI shall make only one intervention, because time is short. The Minister has conceded that there is a need for a public information film. Media representatives to whom I have spoken have told me that they would be delighted to show such a film, given their experience.
When it comes to insurance, whether it be for councils which were not insured or for individuals, will the Minister tell the House that he will not adopt the argument of the hon. Member for North Tayside (Mr. Walker) and say that nothing can be done because other people were insured? That is not what Scotland would want, given the extremity of the conditions that were faced by everyone over the past few weeks.
§ Mr. KynochThe hon. Gentleman should have been patient, because I intended to refer to the difficult position of domestic customers.
All the authorities took what steps they could to try to ensure that domestic customers were protected in the first instance. Industry was closed over the relevant period. I emphasise again that emergency planning is a regional council responsibility. The authorities were stretched, but they did not ask for assistance. They were constantly offered it by myself and my ministerial colleagues. The authorities were in the forefront in dealing with the emergency, and I stress that I believe that they performed commendably.
The Government are aware that thousands of Scottish householders in both the public and private sectors have been affected, mainly as a result of burst pipes. Local housing authorities and other agencies responded vigorously, both to the problems in their council houses and by securing temporary accommodation for those made homeless. I am aware that all public sector landlords are working as hard as they can to bring affected houses back into habitable condition as soon as possible, to end the ordeal of those who have had to leave their homes.
697 Our understanding from initial discussions with some of the authorities affected is that they are currently assessing the damage to their stock, and are unlikely to be able precisely to quantify the costs involved for some time. It is obviously important that they produce quantifiable information. Once that information is available, my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibilities for housing has expressed his willingness to meet the housing committee of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. He has said that he will consider the authorities' problems sympathetically.
For the most part, the cost of repairs to council houses will initially fall to be met from councils' housing revenue accounts. My hon. Friend the Minister with responsibilities for housing took this factor into account in distributing supplementary housing capital allocations totalling £16.8 million last week to 30 housing authorities facing housing capital receipt shortfalls in the current financial year. My hon. Friend is aware of the problems and has been in steady discussions with the authorities.
In due course, some authorities will be reimbursed from insurance, but councils may still be faced with a bill for any excess charges or items not covered by insurance. Housing revenue costs in providing relief and carrying out immediate work fall within the Bellwin scheme, but, as with non-housing expenditure, insurable losses are not covered by the scheme. Housing authorities that consider that they may be eligible for assistance under the Bellwin scheme should quantify the costs involved and contact the Scottish Office as soon as possible.
The Bellwin scheme, as I have said, covers only non-insurable risks. Local authorities can decide to insure or not. If they do not insure, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said recently, they must have a contingency fund.
§ Mr. Home RobertsonWill the Minister give way?
§ Mr. KynochI do not have time to give way to the hon. Gentleman. I wish to take up a few more points before concluding my reply.
698 Individual tenants and owner-occupiers may have claims against their insurers. As the hon. Member for Shettleston said, some people have difficulty in finding funds to insure. Assistance is available to those in difficult financial circumstances through the Benefits Agency, which has arrangements to cope with such problems. It has been remarkably efficient in dealing with the many claims that it has received.
The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland asked whether insurance premiums were included in the calculation of benefit levels. I am assured that they are.
As for schools, I have been quoted by several hon. Members, especially the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan. The representatives of one newspaper were not present when I made comments about janitors, yet an article appeared in that newspaper on that topic. I merely posed some questions on the basis of what regional councils should be doing. The response of certain newspapers was particularly galling.
Are the necessary precautions in place so that steps can be taken to try to prevent a recurrence of the circumstances that so recently arose?
Reasonable councils should be taking such steps. I remember that, when I was young, the janitor had the authority—indeed, it was part of his duty—to drain water systems. I do not know whether local authorities still do that. I hope that they will look seriously at that alongside the review that my right hon. Friend has instigated.
We must learn lessons. We have been through a particularly severe cold spell. My right hon. Friend has announced that a review will be carried out by a combination of Scottish Office officials, representatives from Scottish Homes, the new water authorities, an existing water department, a local authority emergency planning function and, indeed, representatives of business—the Confederation of British Industry or the Scottish chambers of commerce.
I believe that all those involved in dealing with this exceptionally difficult time did so admirably well, but it is important, as the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland said, to learn lessons, so that we go forward and do things even better in future.