Rules for Severe Weather Payments (Hansard, 14 January 1987)

§ Baroness Jeger
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper:

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Baroness Trumpington)
My Lords, medical advice is that the groups most at risk from hypothermia and other cold-related illness are people over the age of 75 or under one. We have in fact extended the qualifying groups to include those over 65, under two, or chronically sick or disabled.
The qualifying temperature was set not on medical criteria, but on the basis that help would be given one year in five on average. This is because the scheme is intended to give help only when it is exceptionally cold. The qualifying temperature takes account of daily maximum and minimum temperatures, but not wind chill factors.
It is expected that the qualifying temperatures will be reached throughout the country this week. We have therefore announced that the extra £5 payment will be made available to everyone in the qualifying groups for this week.

§ Baroness Jeger
My Lords, I thank the noble Minister for that Answer, but I must press her further. If no medical evidence was taken into consideration in fixing the minus 1.5 degrees, surely this is totally irresponsible. Is it not a fact that the Meteorological Office was asked to pick on a datum line that would ensure that the Government only had to deal with the issue on average once every five years? If that is not true, then I invite the Minister to say so. I will try to keep within the Rules of Order and not abuse Question Time.

Noble Lords
Hear, hear!

§ Baroness Jeger
My Lords, but conceding that, no one has found a real answer to the problem. I want to suggest that it is time we all got together and found some way of giving a winter bonus irrespective of temperatures and ages, so that people do not have to suffer this uncertainty.
May I ask the Minister why the qualifying age for children in families to receive the extra benefit is only two years old? Is it not the case that for the ordinary heating addition, children up to five can qualify? Now I suddenly find that children have to be two years old, or under two years old. So are we not faced with the absurd situation where a family with a two-year-old baby can get an allowance this week but, if the baby has a third birthday next week, cannot get it? Surely this is the sort of rigid arithmetic which shows how useless and stupid this arrangement is.

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Baroness Jeger
My Lords, thirdly—it is not unusual for Front Bench speakers to ask three 551 questions on such an important matter—we welcome of course the sinners who repented yesterday and who agreed that £5 should be given for this week. But will this be paid automatically? Surely the local offices have the records of all those who are on supplementary benefit. Why cannot they be paid automatically instead of having to apply, to have those applications processed and then to wait until the Ministry can deal with the matter before receiving the money they need so badly?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, with regard to the five-year-olds, we considered the point carfully. But, in the light of the improvements which we have already made for this group—automatic entitlement to a heating addition and an increase in the value of their scale rate of over a quarter—we could not give the matter priority. I would point out to the noble Baroness that the amount spent in 1984–85 was about £400 million annually, compared to spending by the last Labour Government of under £90 million.

§ Lord Kilmarnock
My Lords, is it not totally wrong that £500 in savings should disqualify people who would otherwise qualify when that sum is hardly more than the cost of a funeral? Secondly, simply on the question of monitoring, is it not absurd that places in Scotland which last week experienced temperatures of 11,16 and, I think, 18 degrees below, did not qualify because the monitoring stations were in a coastal area? Should not the whole monitoring system also be revised?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, the weather stations were chosen after consultation with the Meteorological Office. We have concentrated on stations where information can be provided quickly to enable help to be assessed as near as possible to the time of bad weather. SSAC has commented that our proposals are manifestly an improvement on past methods.

§ Baroness Turner of Camden
My Lords, would the noble Minister tell the House what arrangements are being made to monitor hypothermia among the elderly? Will she respond to approaches that I understand have been made by the National Pensioners' Convention, who want to make representations to her in that regard?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, the Government are taking the problem of hypothermia very seriously but the underlying causes are uncertain. We are therefore studying the available information closely. We need the right information to produce the right, effective policy.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords, did not my noble friend raise a very serious point when he drew attention to the fact that the micro-climate within a region can vary enormously from that measured at the official station? Would not the Government think it desirable, indeed essential, to increase the network of monitoring stations so that people in areas where severe cold is experienced, who at present do not qualify because of the location of the monitoring station, should 552 nevertheless get the heating allowance to which, by all objective measures, they are fully entitled?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, it is of course the case that an absolute standard means that help will go to places where at any one time it is actually coldest. That seems to me wholly reasonable. SSAC firmly supports an absolute standard. When there was a comparative system in 1984–85, it was heavily criticised, particularly in Scotland.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness this? We have seen appalling pictures on all channels of British television of British men and women around 90 years of age dying because they are too cold almost to live. I do not find any humour in this situation, unlike some of your Lordships on the Benches to my right. I find it an extraordinarily serious and dreadful situation that every night we should hear of somebody dying because they have not enough money to keep themselves warm. In view of this, would it not be possible for the Government, please, to consider the suggestion that they should contact the British Medical Association, some of the local authorities, and particularly the voluntary organisations, who are concerned with this problem, to try to find a formula which will replace the current soulless, barren, mathematical formula on which they are working?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I think the noble Lord exaggerated greatly in the first part of his question. On the second part, I would say we are already closely in touch with all the voluntary organisations, with whom we are working agreeably.

§ Lord Stallard
My Lords, will the noble Baroness accept that the statement made in answer to a Question in another place yesterday was generally welcomed by all the voluntary organisations throughout the country as a step in the right direction? But inevitably and predictably the debate has now moved to another plane and other questions are being asked. Is what is being done enough? Will the assistance get to the right people? How will they get it? In particular, how will those people who pay for their fuel by means of a slot meter as they go along get this extra allowance so that they can put it into the meter, and when will they get it? Finally, may I solicit the noble Baroness's support for my Motion which has been going around for a long time? It calls attention to the need for a comprehensive strategy to end fuel poverty and this annual argy-bargy about who gets what, when and why, and calls for the introduction of a proper, decent policy that all governments can pursue.

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I think it is important that I tell the noble Lord that advertisements including claim forms will appear in the national press this week. Revised instructions have been issued to local offices on publicity when the conditions for payment are met. This includes local press advertisements and a wide distribution of a specific leaflet, both containing the claim form for help. I doubt whether any scheme will ever be seen as fully satisfactory. We have devised a system which provides a reasonable solution judged over the years. 553 Severe winters are not all alike. We cannot keep trying to devise a system based on one year's experience.

§ Lord Kilmarnock
My Lords, can the noble Baroness just answer my question about whether savings of £500 act as a disbarment to people who are otherwise qualified, and whether this is right?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, the £500 savings comes into the question because the people who are entitled to receive severe winter payments are those who are on supplementary benefit. One might spare a thought for those who are just above the level of supplementary benefit. The level was raised from £300 to £500, but there has to be a limit.

§ Baroness Ewart-Biggs
My Lords, does the noble Baroness not agree that one of the best ways to help old people with their fuel bills in cold spells is to ensure that their homes are well insulated? Is she aware that some important home insulation work by the Neighbourhood Energy Action Group has been jeopardised by the intended withdrawal of single payments? Can the Minister say whether the Government have decided on a replacement for this very important benefit as far as home insulation goes?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for the information provided.