Y Pwyllgor Deisebau

Petitions Committee

27/03/2023

Aelodau'r Pwyllgor a oedd yn bresennol

Committee Members in Attendance

Buffy Williams
Jack Sargeant Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor
Committee Chair
Joel James
Luke Fletcher
Rhys ab Owen

Y rhai eraill a oedd yn bresennol

Others in Attendance

Ben Saltmarsh National Energy Action Cymru
National Energy Action Cymru
Bethan Sayed Climate Cymru
Climate Cymru
Dean Kirby Newyddiadurwr, The i
Journalist, The i
Luke Young Cyngor ar Bopeth
Citizens Advice

Swyddogion y Senedd a oedd yn bresennol

Senedd Officials in Attendance

Gareth Price Clerc
Clerk
Kayleigh Imperato Dirprwy Glerc
Deputy Clerk
Mared Llwyd Ail Glerc
Second Clerk
Samiwel Davies Cynghorydd Cyfreithiol
Legal Adviser

Cofnodir y trafodion yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir trawsgrifiad o’r cyfieithu ar y pryd. Lle mae cyfranwyr wedi darparu cywiriadau i’w tystiolaeth, nodir y rheini yn y trawsgrifiad.

The proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the transcript.

Cyfarfu’r pwyllgor yn y Senedd a thrwy gynhadledd fideo.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 14:01.

The committee met in the Senedd and by video-conference.

The meeting began at 14:01.

1. Cyflwyniad, ymddiheuriadau, dirprwyon a datgan buddiannau
1. Introductions, apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest

Prynhawn da a chroeso cynnes i chi i gyfarfod y Pwyllgor Deisebau. 

Good afternoon. A very warm welcome to you all to this meeting of the Petitions Committee. 

Can I welcome everybody to this afternoon's hybrid meeting of the Senedd Petitions Committee? As a reminder, we are being broadcast live on Senedd.tv, and the Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. Aside from the adaptations to conducting business in proceedings in a hybrid format, all of the Standing Orders requirements remain in place. 

Item 1 on today's agenda—apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest. I've received no apologies today, and I remind Members that they should note any declarations of interest either now or at the relevant point during today's proceedings. 

2. Sesiwn dystiolaeth 1- P-06-1326 Dylai’r Senedd graffu ar y sgandal mesuryddion rhagdalu yng Nghymru
2. Evidence session 1 - P-06-1326 The Senedd should scrutinise the prepayment meter scandal in Wales

Okay. Moving to item 2 then, it's our first evidence session on petition P-06-1326, 'The Senedd should scrutinise the prepayment meter scandal in Wales'. Before we go to questions from Members, can I welcome the witnesses? We have Bethan Sayed, Luke Young and Ben Saltmarsh here with us today. Perhaps I could start with you, Bethan, to introduce yourself for the Record of Proceedings. 

Shwmae? My name's Bethan Sayed, and I'm campaigns co-ordinator for the Warm this Winter campaign for Climate Cymru. 

Thank you, Chair. My name's Luke Young. I'm the assistant director of Citizens Advice Cymru. 

My name is Ben Saltmarsh, and I work as head of Wales for National Energy Action.

Well, thank you, all, for that, and thank you for taking the time to come to committee today. I think this is a particularly important petition. We will jump into questions from Members. I think I should probably start by noting my interest in this area, and others—I know committee members have been interested in this area. But it is something that has affected many, many people across Wales and the United Kingdom. There's a limit—we'll set it out at the start—to what the committee may be able to do, but, nevertheless, it's important, I think, that we do undertake this piece of work and see where we get with it. 

I'll move straight into questions, because we've got about 40 minutes of this session. Buffy Williams. 

Thank you, Chair, and thanks for joining us this afternoon. My question is to Bethan. Why did you submit this petition, and what are you hoping to achieve?

Thank you for the question, Buffy, and thank you, also, to the committee for hearing us out and for taking this issue seriously, and for all your hard work on it as individual MSs as well.

We wanted to put this petition in because we know that it's a massive injustice, what's happening with the prepayment meters. It's a scandal, basically, that people are being forced onto prepayment meters during this cost-of-living crisis. And, in Wales, as part of Climate Cymru's work, I run the Warm this Winter campaign, which is part of a UK-wide campaign, looking at the cost of living, but looking at how we can come up with solutions, through energy efficiency, through renewable energy, and through ending fossil fuel here in Wales. 

So, it's a massive injustice, but what I want to say is that we do have the solutions. So, only this morning, me and my team were visiting the hydro scheme at Ynni Ogwen, and they make £500 a day that can go back into the local community and take money from people's bills, so that they can afford to pay, and that they can, then, afford to live in a way that's comfortable during the most difficult times.

So, my question is back to the Welsh Government and to the UK Government: what more investment can we put into renewables in Wales, so that communities can do things for themselves? What can we spearhead in our own communities to make them stronger and bolder during these difficult times? That's a challenge I want to pose to you as Members.

And before anybody else comes in, I just want to finish on this. At the end of the day, British Gas has made profits of £3.2 billion. The boss of British Gas has had a bonus of £3.7 million. Don't tell me there's no money for renewables. Don't tell me there's no money to get people out of this cost-of-living crisis. There is, it's just priorities. And unless we force these companies to stop them putting people on forced prepayment meters, they will not change. Therefore, Ofgem and others must come together, with Government, to stop these practices from happening. There's money there, but it needs to go the right places.

14:05

Thank you, Buffy. Thank you, Bethan as well. Before I bring other Members in—and we will go into perhaps some more detailed figures shortly—just before I came to committee, I saw a BBC article that said that 94,000 prepayment meters were fitted in the last year alone. That seems quite a remarkable figure. Bethan, you talked about solutions there. One of the things I'm wondering as well is whether you think Government needs to legislate, and I specifically mean UK Government here. We know that, in the late 1990s, the water industry was similar, and people legislated. I've read many stories on this and, my personal opinion is that if you changed water for energy, you could read the same story now in 2023. Do you think we're at the similar time and a similar need for legislation to protect vulnerable households?

Yes, definitely, it needs to emulate water, and I've seen that you've raised this in the Chamber, Jack, and Ministers have replied supporting your call for legislation on a UK level to ensure that they are not treated in the same way. This needs to happen so that people are protected and that, if they are in a vulnerable position, they're not put into a position where they are made homeless, or they cannot afford to pay their bills or they're indebted. So, I would like to see one of the suggestions coming from this inquiry to give it the same legs as water and for it to be treated as a public utility in every sense. Nobody should be denied access to energy, and that's why the UK campaign, Energy4All is something that Warm this Winter is endorsing as well.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Some important points I think have been raised already. In terms of energy, just like water, it's essential for people, so there's a question as to why people are struggling as they are. And I was quite interested to read what Citizens Advice published—around 27,000 people, potentially, have been forced on to prepayment meters in 2022. If I could come to Luke in Citizens Advice, I'd be interested if you would be able to talk us through, perhaps, some of those findings from the 'Kept in the dark (Wales)' research and, as well, if there's any update to that figure for 2023 as it stands at the moment.

Of course, yes. So, the 'Kept in the dark' report was a mixture of some of our service data, but also some survey work that we did on the basis that we were in the middle of winter and all of our statistics and all of the data and evidence that we had were saying that there was a major problem with prepayment meters—being able to afford them and also our clients being forced on to prepayment meters.

So, for more up-to-date figures, actually, the statistics that the Chair mentioned, coming out today from Grant Shapps's department, show that around 97,000 households across the UK were forced on to prepayment meters. Looking at those, broken down by energy company—and we don't have Wales-level data on that yet; I've searched for it before this committee but that hasn't been realised by them as of yet that I've been able to see—it is a really stark difference. At the low end of the table, you've got one energy company with around 30 or so forced installations of prepayment meters last year in 2022. And then, at the top, you've two energy companies that, between them, are responsible for just under 50,000 forced installation of prepayment meters last year. And that is during all of the times and leading into winter when we knew that there was a problem, when everything about it said that there was a problem.

What we do know, in addition to 'Kept in the dark' and by looking at our service data, is who has come in to Citizens Advice for advice and support. Each month, we release a dashboard that shows some of the trends. Our latest dashboard is due out in the next week or so, but, actually, the trend has been the same since December and February time. We have seen a drop-off in the number of people coming to us for forced installation of prepayment meters. I mean, that's good, because you would expect that now that action has been taken and firmer rules are currently in place, but they still remain at a record high, which means that there are still some of those issues working through the system. But continually, the ability to pay for prepayment meters remains at record-high levels. So, separately to this stream of work, our work in debt is predicting that this year is going to be a year of a potential debt crisis, and we see prepayment meters as being symbolic of that.

14:10

In terms of the figures that Citizens Advice had quoted, those were based on just Citizens Advice service users, so the figures actually could be a lot bigger.

Well, in 'Kept in the dark' it was a mixture of survey data that we did, which had an estimate over Wales for how many thousands of people we thought would be on prepayment meters by the end of winter. I think, in committee in January, I quoted 4,000 extra people by the end of winter if no action was taken at that point. With our service data, our service data is those who come directly to us, so that's in the hundreds every month. For example, the number of people who were moved to a prepayment meter to pay off arrears in February was just under 100, and that number has been dropping over the months. So, that report in itself was a response to saying, 'We need a greater understanding of what's happening, because the numbers of people coming to us don't match up with all of the other bits of intel that we've got from around the system in saying that this is a big problem'. Often, what happens with Citizens Advice services is that people come to us when they're in crisis. So, we can fully expect that, had there not been action taken at the beginning of February and energy companies not having been shamed into action, our numbers would have continued rising over the next few months. But for up-to-date data from us, that should be out in the next week or so, and I will happily make sure that that's shared with the full committee.

Great, thank you. If I could just come back to the mention you made of UK Government figures around this, is it that the data they provide isn't aggregated to a Welsh level? And, if that is the case, do you think that there's a role for Welsh Government to collect this data itself?

So, the UK Government data is responding to Grant Shapps's edict to energy companies to fess up, pretty much, and that's been released in a press release today by his department. I looked in the Excel tables that have been released so far, and there wasn't a Wales breakdown. But if you have a think about the two worst offenders, as such, there, at the top of that table were British Gas, Centrica and Scottish Power, between them responsible for just under 50,000 forced installations across the UK, you can guarantee a big chunk of those will be in Welsh households as well. So, we're asking for the figures, and certainly, anything that the committee or the Welsh Government could do to get those would be useful.

I think the committee will ask for those figures, actually. It seems to me that it would be easy to get those figures. They've got the figures already in front of them, so a breakdown for Wales shouldn't be much of an issue. Ben, you wanted to come in, and then back to Luke.

Sure. I see no reason why those figures couldn't be made available, and they would be very welcome if the committee and others could push for those.

Just a note furthering what Luke just said as well, energy suppliers report on a monthly or quarterly basis under their social obligations reporting to Ofgem, and there's quite a lot of data within that that would be very useful about the levels of prepayment meters, be that traditional or smart, the levels of debt, if you are in arrears whether you're on a repayment arrangement yet or not, which are often disaggregated by nation, but not necessarily published disaggregated by nation. So, any pressure or support for more of that data to be disaggregated by nation and published would be very welcome as well, because that would give us a much clearer picture of exactly what the picture is in Wales and whether that is equivalent and comparative with what's happening in England, Scotland, and across GB, or whether, actually, there are particularly acute issues in one of those nations that are perhaps being masked by the fact that they are less severe in other nations as well. So, hopefully that's helpful.

Thank you for that. I can see Bethan nodding in agreement with that call, as well. Rhys, do you want to come in?

14:15

Yes. A couple of questions following that line of questioning by Luke. To the other Luke, now: why is there this huge disparity between the energy providers?

Oh. In all honesty, I'm not—. So, just for some clarity, you mean in the difference between the lowest and the highest who are forced to be on prepayment meters?

Yes. The level's incredible, isn't it? The level of disparity between the energy providers is incredible, but what reasons are given for that huge level of disparity?

I don't think we have clarity on what even their justification is at this point. I think the figures we have today are released by the UK Government after saying, 'We want to know how many people you've put on to prepayment meters', but those numbers, just looking at them as they've been released, are incredibly different. As I said, the lowest is there in the thirties and the highest two each have just under 25,000.

Now, if we take back, as to what we know, we already know that energy companies weren't listening to any of the warning signs that were given off last summer into autumn and into winter. The energy regulator failed customers from the beginning and wasn't listening or taking any action, despite how urgent—and many voices, including ones in this committee, were raised. And so, what we've got is this situation where—. And also, it's worth saying that this was at the same time when PR people for all of these energy companies, including the worst offenders, were having multiple meetings with Ministers of different Governments, saying, 'Oh, well we've done everything that we can, we're doing everything we can to support vulnerable people'. And then, you see the evidence today, which is that two providers are responsible for just under 50,000 forced prepayment meters in that period. So, there's a huge disconnect between the PR, what has been told to Ministers, and what is actually coming out today. So, I think there are some questions there that we would ask, and maybe the committee could as well. Those energy companies have met with Welsh Government Ministers multiple times. Do these stats that have come out today bear out what they were being told in meetings in the autumn and winter?

Yes, well, I think those are certainly questions we could level to those energy providers. When you answered the other Luke—Luke Fletcher—about the numbers you've had in, through Citizens Advice, it just made me worry about—. For people to approach you or to approach Bethan or any other organisation, they need to have some knowledge, don't they, to be able to go to these people, to these organisations. What concerns me are the people falling between the cracks, those people who don't appeal when their benefits are refused, these people who don't know how to challenge decisions. And we all know, from our professional lives, that there are loads of people who fall into these categories. What can be done to try and find these people? Because it's quite a thing for somebody to actually approach Citizens Advice, isn't it? How can we actually find and assist these people, because the energy companies won't signpost these people in the right direction, will they?

So, if I can illustrate that point and then come to your answer, which is—. I'm aware of a case in the Member for Rhondda's constituency, where a constituent had a debt relief order already in place and an energy company refused to move them on to a payment scheme. Within a few months—and this was why they had come to Citizens Advice, by the way, because they were in crisis by that point—they refused to move them on to a payment scheme and then took them to court a few months later, and the debt that they owed was already at over £1,000. They took them to court to put in a prepayment meter, which, at that point, you are basically saying, 'We're putting in a prepayment meter and you will be cut off this winter, because there's no way you can sustain that level of debt and payment'. Now, that's for someone for whom Citizens Advice was a viable option, they might've known the local brand, they might've called our national helpline, they got help and support.

But you are absolutely right, the thing that worries us and one of the reasons that we did some of the survey work in 'Kept in the dark (Wales)' is that we know there is a hidden population of people who are struggling, who don't always come to Citizens Advice, they may go to other services, but there is a wider group, throughout the cost-of-living crisis, who are finding themselves in need of advice for the first time ever. And that's why we, and also, with points from the Welsh Government, or campaigns for things like 'Claim what's yours', we all try to do our bit, and, actually, Ben will be able to speak as well, as chair of the Fuel Poverty Coalition, as to some actions that members of that have taken—we are one of those. But it is a continual struggle for us, obviously, to get that message out to those who are in distress but not able to access all of the systems that need to be there. So, we do all of the things that we possibly can, which is be available online, on the phone, have offices open so that we can set up appointments. But I say that—with every service right now in the cost-of-living crisis, there are pressures in those services, and that, sometimes, means that people have to wait.

14:20

I'll bring Bethan in—you wanted to come in on this point—and then, we'll move to questions from Joel James.

Yes, just quickly, like I started with, the hydro scheme, for example, in Ynni Ogwen, pays for the energy support providers; they have energy wardens, and that person, then, can go out into the community and give the advice that's needed. We met with the young gentleman today, Iago, who does that work, and he said that he started by knocking doors, and that just was not the best way to do it—by cold-calling. So, what they do is embed themselves into the communities—like many of you know, as politicians—not saying that it's there to give them energy, but that, if they happen to be holding an event in the local community, or if they are putting on warm meals in the evening, then have somebody or some people there ready to give advice, so it doesn't have to be somehow making them feel that they're asking for help. I think that's the way you have to sometimes do things, so that it's not branded as if they're going and saying that they're desperate, because that doesn't come over very well either. So that, I think, is something that we all need to work on, but I would say that we need more advice services and more support for those advice services here in Wales, because they're doing a sterling job.

Thank you, Chair. And thanks ever so much for coming in today. I just wanted to ask a very generalised question, really, in the sense of the impacts that you're aware of, of those most vulnerable, then. What sort of impact is this having on them? Do you have specific examples you could cite then, really—so, in terms of young people, or maybe those with disabilities, or even the elderly, really, just examples that we could look more into, I suppose? Thank you.

Well, I think that, at the very outset, it's important to recognise, as the Chair's mentioned already, that energy is an essential service, so it isn't, ultimately, about the consumption of kilowatt hours, it's about keeping warm, and having light, and cooking food, and using everyday appliances—it's about our everyday comfort, and warmth, and well-being, and security. And so, the absence of energy, when you have to self-ration and reduce the amount that you're using of necessity because you simply cannot afford to feed the meter to pay for it, and, ultimately, to the point where you then go without supply, is grave and severe. So, people who are—. Because I'm not sure what we thought would happen, if you're struggling in the cost-of-living crisis with exceptionally high energy prices, and you're falling behind and into debt because you cannot afford to keep up with your bills, if you then move somebody on to a prepayment meter, where they then have to pay slightly higher prices for the same level of energy, and something towards the debt that they owe, what did we think would happen?

And so, then you go without supply, to the great detriment of your health and well-being. We know that people are rationing their usage to the detriment of their health, we know that people are going without cooked food, or skipping meals, in order to feed their children. We've got record numbers of people in arrears with their supplier, we've got record numbers of people seeking emergency assistance and help, and we have record numbers of people in fuel poverty. Back in April of 2022, the Welsh Government estimated that up to 45 per cent of all households in Wales were currently in fuel poverty. That includes 98 per cent of all our lower income households—so, virtually, all our lower income households. Over four in 10 of those lower income households were actually estimated to be in deep, severe fuel poverty, having to pay huge portions of their income, or needing to pay huge portions of their income, just to try and keep warm. And we have as many people likely today in severe fuel poverty as we did in fuel poverty in its entirety back in 2018, when the previous estimates were published. So, the situation is very, very worrying. And that, by the way, was when prices were an average of £2,000 a year; today, they stand at an average of £2,500 a year, as protected by the energy price guarantee.

Now, thankfully, that isn't going to increase come April—that will be maintained at that level, although we will actually see our prices increase somewhat still, because the universal £400 payment through the energy bill support scheme that's, essentially, taking about £66, £67 a month off our bills will come to an end, so there's a cliff edge in support and the situation may get worse, despite the fact that wholesale prices are beginning to fall. And they're here to stay—high prices are here to stay. We know from Cornwall Insight and others that estimates currently—that, throughout the rest of this year, prices are still likely to be at an average of about £2,300, £2,400 a year. And of course, if you live on a very low income, that is, essentially, unaffordable. It's unobtainable. It's far too high. It's more than double what it was this time last year and—. Yes, I think it's very, very worrying indeed.

14:25

Thanks ever so much for that, and I suppose the other question, then, I had—it might be best for you, Ben; you might be able to answer—it's something I read about years ago, and I just wanted to see if it's still a practice that is done now in terms of landlords, in terms of the energy meters and everything. I can't remember what it was called, but it was a process where they would have something attached to the energy meter, which meant that, when you paid, the landlord would get a percentage of that money as well. Is that something you're aware of? Is that something that's still common practice? 

It's not particularly cases that have come across my desk or the desk of colleagues, as far as I'm aware. I understand there are regulations about if the landlord becomes involved in the resale of gas or electricity; there are strict rules as to what he or she must do in order to follow that. Essentially, they have to charge the tenant what it costs, so the cost of the units that you use, and you can add on, obviously, the 5 per cent VAT, just like the gas and electricity companies do, but you shouldn't be making any additional money on top of that. But we do know that levels of prepayment meters are much higher in the private rented sector compared to the owner occupied sector. So, I think under the Welsh housing condition survey in 2018, with respect to electricity prepayment meters, as an example, something like 5 per cent of all owner occupied homes had a prepayment meter compared to something like 23 per cent of all accommodation in the private rented sector, compared to 46 per cent in social housing. So, it also varies significantly by tenure too. 

Sorry, I have to go soon, because I have to get a train back from Bangor to south Wales, so I just wanted to finish, really, and I'm sure that others can continue with this session. Just to say we do need to have a reform of the energy market. As far as we are concerned, we also need to look at Ofgem and how they regulate. We're seeing how this UK Government are treating people with regards to their energy usage, and it's unhealthy and it's scandalous. If the committee can relay this to the Welsh Government and to the UK Government too, we would be very grateful, but also to try and perhaps accrue some of those powers to Wales so that we can be the masters of our own destiny. I think that's what we would say as well. We have a wealth of natural resource in Wales—let's use it. And thank you for committing to this inquiry, and I look forward to hearing what more you do. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Diolch, Bethan. Thank you for that, and we understand that you have to leave. We've got some more questions to Ben and to Luke. Just to say, we will be inviting Ofgem and energy suppliers into committee, and we hope they take it as seriously as we certainly do. On that note, though, thank you for coming, Bethan, and we'll certainly be in touch. I'll move to Rhys ab Owen. 

Excellent, Chair. Well, you've just heard a passionate argument there by Bethan Sayed of the need to reform, but how would you reform it? What would you replace the current system with? 

So, in respect of prepayment meters. 

So, I think one thing that's important to be aware of is that there are existing rules that suppliers operate under under their supplier licence conditions that were actually designed to protect some of the instances that we've seen reached through The Times investigation, and the work by Dean Kirby at The i paper, for example. But, clearly, they weren't being followed. So, now there is a temporary suspension in the forced installations of prepayment meters. That was due to end at the end of this month. We understand that that's now been extended indefinitely until all suppliers can prove that they are operating under a new code of practice that Ofgem are working on and developing. 

That is very welcome and that is necessary, but we need, ultimately, much stronger rules and sharper enforcement with the greatest protections in place for those that are vulnerable. So, I think there is an immediate need to ensure that that enforcement action is strong and robust, not just for the suppliers, but also to right the wrong that some households have experienced and suffered—so, that might mean reversing wrongful installs, it might mean compensating those households, as an example—and then we need to strengthen those protections and licence conditions that are in place. Those protections heed to be clear and prescriptive, or more prescriptive, I suspect, especially if they were already largely in place but then not being followed, and some suppliers interpreted them in particular ways, which perhaps may account for why some suppliers have only installed a handful of prepayment meters, judging by the evidence that was shared earlier by Luke and the Chair, and others have been to the tune of 25,000 in the last year. And quite simply, some households should never have a forced prepayment meter fitted, be that a traditional prepayment meter or a smart prepayment meter—there’s just too much risk, they're too high risk, whether that’s those who are dependent on medical equipment or a warm home because of a health need, as an example, or whether that’s because you’ve got very young children, or you’re elderly, or you have a physical or mental disability that would prevent you from being able to top it up.

And we also need parity, so those rules need to be the same for those that are on a smart meter that is interoperable between credit and prepay, to protect those being remotely switched from one to the other without their consent. And I don’t think we should be installing legacy or traditional prepayment meters at all now. In fact, we shouldn’t have been anyway, under something called the new and replacement obligation. But, clearly, that has been being done, so we need to ensure enforcement action is strong, and we need to strengthen the licence conditions, and then, beyond that, we need a root-and-branch review of prepayment anyway. We need to reduce the number of traditional prepayment meters that are in use in Wales. We have disproportionately more in use in Wales than in England, and it varies by tenure, as I described earlier.

We need to make prepayment meter tariffs much fairer. Thankfully, the UK Government has said that, from 1 July, the prepay premium, the additional money that you would spend on a prepayment meter, will come to an end, so, hopefully, that will come to pass. There’s still an issue there, though, with standing charges, which might be something the committee wants to look at and discuss later, and we’d need to address the sheer amount of debt that people will be facing. As Luke mentioned earlier, I think one of the grave and terrible legacies of this crisis will be an overwhelming amount of debt, and I think the UK Government has a key role to play in helping address that for the most vulnerable households as well.

14:30

Thanks very much, Ben. I think we all welcome that they say that they’re not going to do it indefinitely. What concerns me is the people who have been forced onto it. What happens to them? Because we’re saying, 'Well, you can’t do this from now on', but, in the meantime, thousands of people have been forced onto this unjust system and will be carrying on on that system. What happens to them? Because words like 'reviewing' or 'plans to compensate' sound very long term to me. What happens to that household that is struggling right now, or don’t know how to warm the house, or to feed their children today, tonight, tomorrow? What effective support can they receive now?

Well, I didn’t mean to give the impression that the review and the compensation and enforcement action that needs to be sharp and strong should take a long time. I think it is urgent.

I know you weren’t suggesting it should take a long time, I wasn't suggesting that at all, but my concern is that these things can take a long time, and even a few weeks is too long—or days is too long. What immediate action can be given to support these households?

Well, I think if households are currently struggling, as we know that they are, then the key thing is that they don’t suffer in silence, as we were alluding to earlier. Sadly, many do, and it’s very, very difficult, when you’re in arrears with your supplier, and they’re in a position, essentially, of power, if you owe them money, for you to contact your supplier and then try to negotiate your way off it [Correction: 'through it']. So, that highlights, if nothing else, the essential importance of the advice services that are there to support them, whether that’s across Wales through Citizens Advice or Warm Wales or Care and Repair Cymru or whoever it may be, or whether it’s through your local or regional advice organisation, and we play a big role in supporting all of those organisations to train and upskill their staff. But it’s about getting the word out there that help and support is available, and I think in the short term that also highlights the importance of the Welsh Government and other UK Government emergency support that’s been made available through things like the national fuel voucher scheme, the winter fuel support scheme that ran last winter and the winter just gone, and others. Because, as you say, if you simply are on a meter that restricts you from having access to energy unless you can top it up first, and you do not have the money in your pocket to feed the meter, you will go without otherwise.

I want to bring Joel in now. We’ve got about five minutes left of this session. Ben, I'm going to ask you the same question I asked Bethan. In the late 1990s the water industry was legislated to reform. Do you think we’re at a similar time now, where we need to legislate to protect the most vulnerable customers with regard to energy?

14:35

I think, in many ways, yes. So, I think that energy is an essential service, as I explained earlier, just like water is, and the greatest protections need to be in place for those who are vulnerable. There are some households, as mentioned previously, that should never be faced with being forcibly fitted with a prepayment meter. Some people—other people—do prefer the choice and like the element of control or help towards budgeting that they may bring. They should only ever be smart, they should be interoperable between credit and prepay, and the rules need to be very, very clear that, if you are to have one, these are the benefits, these are the potential disadvantages, but is it safe and is it reasonably practicable for you to be on one? If the answer to that question is 'no', then you should not have one installed.

It's interesting—. I will bring Joel in now, but it's interesting, the point you raised on prepayment meters in general. I think it was in 1995 that the First Minister wrote a report on token meters, and we're nearly 30 years on still having this conversation, and that's a UK Government fault. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair, but I think Ben just answered my question. I wanted to know, really, if there was a place for prepayment meters, and you touched upon it there.

Thank you, Joel. Luke, I'll turn to you. There are three minutes and 30 seconds left. I'm conscious that we're inviting Ofgem to a future session. We'll be inviting suppliers to that session. What do you think the committee should ask them?

Just to add on to the points that Ben raised earlier around reform, I think suppliers currently work on the basis that you have to prove vulnerability within a household. I think asking them for a commitment that they will assume that there's vulnerability until proven otherwise might help turn the system on its head a bit. It could end up that that needs to be put into law or into regulation, but I think that trying to get a commitment out of them around that space is worth doing.

I also think that some firm challenge would be useful and helpful on why they spent months meeting with Ministers and what was their thinking in doing so, because it's my opinion that it was to run down the clock on winter. We already knew that forced prepayment meters were spiking, in terms of our data; that was out there in the public towards August/September time. Voices such as yourselves were also speaking out throughout autumn. The change only really happened at the end of January/beginning of February, when energy companies and Ofgem were shamed into it by a The Times investigation.

So, I think some scrutiny, really, on, 'Was everything that you were saying at the time all public relations bluster, because vulnerable people were being moved onto prepayment meters? You had power to take action but did you do it?' I think those questions would be really useful.  

I think those will certainly be some questions in there. Ben, do you have any comment?

Yes, a couple of things, actually. I agree entirely with Luke about moving the burden of proof onto suppliers, so that you should be assumed to be vulnerable and that it may not be safe and reasonably practicable to have a prepayment meter, or a smart meter in prepay mode, unless proven otherwise.

One thing to note is that the new code of practice that Ofgem are working on will not be legally enforceable; it will need to become a licence condition. So, it may be a practical step to take to get it done now, coming back to your point, Rhys, but the new code of practice that all suppliers need to abide by will be a temporary thing, as I understand it, for it to become part of the licence and to be legally enforceable later in the year, but it's worth noting that.

The third point here is that we've touched on, I think, advice services and the importance of those. In respect of the Welsh Government, I think the other key role that the Welsh Government can have is that there's an urgent need to accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in fuel-poor homes as well. Of course, if you live in a very old and leaky, inefficient house, you need to use more energy in order to keep warm. The likelihood, especially if you're on a prepayment meter, or you're on a low income and you're vulnerable, is you're just going to spend less time with an adequately warm home.

So, any steps that we can take through the next iteration of the Warm Homes programme—we understand that the new demand-led scheme is due to be procured and operational by the end of this year—to not just provide independent, holistic energy advice around all of these issues, but also to insulate and make people's homes much warmer, greener, healthier places to live, will support all of this very welcome work that this committee is involved in today too.

Thank you, Ben—thanks to Luke as well. That does bring us very nicely to the close of this session. Before we move on, just to say there will be a publication of the transcript; for factual accuracy, please check that and update it if necessary. We may have some further questions as we go through this inquiry, but I'm sure we'll be in touch. And, likewise, if there are things you think you could have said, please feel free to get in touch. We'll move on to item 3 now. So, at that point, I will thank again Bethan, Luke and Ben for your time today and for the important information in the evidence session that we've had with you. Diolch yn fawr.

14:40
3. Deisebau newydd
3. New Petitions

Okay. Moving on to item 3 today, then: new petitions. Item 3.1, P-06-1325, 'Lower the speed limit on the A5 through Glasfryn'. 

'We are calling for a speed limit of 30mph to be set on the A5 through the village of Glasfryn as a matter of urgency and before someone is killed.

'Families live on the edge of this busy and dangerous road. Businesses are conducted very near to the road and farmers and contractors use the road daily to conduct their businesses.

'Over the years, there have been a number of serious accidents including one fatality and several near misses. This is an urgent matter as it is only a matter of time before another serious incident occurs.'

And this was submitted by Gwennol Ellis, with 271 signatures. I will bring Members in to discuss this petition and any actions we may wish to take. Buffy Williams.

Thank you, Chair. I'd like to thank the petitioner for submitting this petition, and I'd also like to take into account the petitioner's concerns that Glasfryn is the only village on the A5 where cars are allowed to travel at 60 mph. I think we should write to the Minister for clarification on this and also request that this stretch of road be prioritised for another review once the new guidance in the new road review is published. I don't know what more we can do with this petition apart from that, and maybe leave it open and wait for any outcome in the future.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr for that, Buffy. There's a suggestion to write to the Minister. Do Members agree? They do. Thank you, Buffy. We'll note that and move forward.

4. Y wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am ddeisebau blaenorol
4. Updates to previous petitions

Item 4: updates to previous petitions. Item 4.1, P-05-1112, 'Help Welsh Communities Buy Community Assets: Implement Part 5 Chapter 3 of the Localism Act 2011'. I will bring in Members to discuss this petition and any actions. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. I've done quite a bit on this with the Local Government and Housing Committee, and obviously you may remember they published a report a few months ago and the Minister responded to their recommendations. I know that you have also been in touch with the Minister, and some of the timescales haven't necessarily been set in stone yet. And I know that we're probably coming to the end of what we can do as the Petitions Committee on this, but I think that information would be quite relevant, before we make a final decision. And, if it's okay with the rest of the committee, I think it would be a good idea to write to the Minister just to see what's happening there.

Thank you, Joel. I can see Members are content with that and agree. We'll write back to the Minister to seek that further clarification. As you say, I think this is a petition that means a lot to everyone across Wales.

Item 4.2, P-06-1190, 'Ban the use of peat in horticulture and all growing media by 2023'. This was submitted by Jake Rayson, with 1,014 signatures. And I'll bring Luke Fletcher in to discuss it. 

Diolch, Cadeirydd. There's now a commitment from the UK and Welsh Governments to ban the sale of peat compost, so I think at this point now it's time for the committee to close the petition and congratulate the petitioner.

Thank you, Luke. I can see Members fully agree with that. Certainly, again, a successful petition, so congratulations and well done to Jake Rayson for his work on that issue.

Item 4.3, P-06-1272, 'Ban the use of "no pet clauses" in tenancy agreements in Wales', submitted by Sam Swash, with 857 signatures. I will declare an interest at this point. I know Sam well, so I will remove myself from any decision on this petition, but bring in Rhys ab Owen.

Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd. This has been discussed at both this committee and the Local Government and Housing Committee, but I note a series of questions from the petitioner that his concerns have not been fully answered, that he feels that the imbalance is still there and the onus is on tenants to challenge this, and it's unclear what level of support Welsh Government will give tenants who want to challenge this. In my view, we've had this series of questions from the petitioner, I agree there is a lack of clarity there, so my suggestion is that we put those questions to the Minister and await her answers.

14:45

Diolch yn fawr, Rhys. Do Members agree? They do. Okay.

Item 4.4, P-06-1275, 'Call on the Government to reconsider its decision to withdraw from the Llanbedr bypass scheme'. This was submitted by Annwen Hughes with 2,704 signatures. To note, we have received correspondence, not from Annwen, but from a local community councillor today, and there was also a protest, I believe, over the weekend, about this decision. I will bring Buffy Williams in to talk to the petition.

Thank you, Chair. I'm not quite sure where we can go with this petition from here. I note the Welsh Government's willingness to work with Gwynedd Council to explore alternative solutions on this issue, but for the Petitions Committee, I'm not quite sure where we can go with this, so I suggest that, as there are ongoing talks, I think that for us, anyway, as a Petitions Committee, we should thank the petitioner and close this petition.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I take the point in terms of that it's difficult to know where this committee can go on this particular petition, but I think it's important to note why people are so frustrated with what's gone on. My colleague Mabon ap Gwynfor, I think, has set it out really well. Communities have been waiting a long time for a lot of these proposals. In the case of Llanbedr, it's been almost 50 years, if not more than 50 years, give or take. In Llanbedr, the main source of contention here is a bridge that was built in the Cromwellian era, which isn't suitable for today's level of traffic or the size of the vehicles. I think it's important to note the frustrations of residents on this particular proposal by Welsh Government. I note as well that there's a meeting on 30 March with the Deputy Minister, with members of that local community. I hope that they're lucky in their endeavour there. But it's important, I think, as a committee, that we do note the frustrations that communities are feeling and that's why they come to us.

We certainly can note those comments, wish them well in their meeting and every success with the meeting with the Deputy Minister. You're right; one of the ways of airing frustrations, or certainly raising awareness of their campaign, is to start a petition, and I certainly think it has done that, and obviously they can use part of our process as a committee in their discussions with the Minister as well. Just to confirm, we're happy to close the petition, but note the frustrations with the process. Yes, okay.

Item 4.5, P-06-1299, 'Welsh Government "Freeze on road building" to include a clause for cases that pose a danger to life', submitted by Susan Blaney with 455 signatures. I'll bring in Joel James to speak to the petition.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted some clarification, really, for further information purposes. I know this road quite well and there's a big community campaign to try and get a bypass route put in. And I know from the initial text of the petition, it highlights that it's been on the local authority's development plan for years and nothing seems to have happened. Obviously, with the roads review that was announced when this petition was first put in, there was concern there that, as a result, the bypass would never be built. I note also we've had very little direction from the petitioner when we have gone back to them with comments.

I just feel as if we've not necessarily answered what the spirit of the petition was, which was to try and push for the bypass to be built. Is there anything we can do to maybe write to the local council to say that we've had this petition? There is a lot of public support for it. Is that something that we can do, rather than close the petition? I just feel that—again, we've not necessarily had any guidance from the petitioner—but I just feel that there is something that we can do, a little bit more, then at least we've done something, or tried to do something.

14:50

Thanks for that, Joel. Perhaps the suggestion that should be made is we will consider what we can do and bring it forward to the next meeting—

—available for Members, rather than off-the-cuff. Let's have a think about what we can do. 

I certainly think the suggestion that we write to the local authority and see what they're doing to ameliorate the matters at the heart of the petition seems like a reasonable one. 

Yes, because I remember the incident they cited quite well, with the fire. It caused chaos, and nothing was coming in or out of that valley. 

Yes, okay. Happy? Are Members happy? Yes, they are. Okay.

Item 4.6, P-06-1286, 'To ensure treatment and screening for cancer continues during COVID19'. This was submitted by Ellie-may Sharpe, with 50 signatures. I'll bring Luke Fletcher in to discuss further. 

Diolch, Cadeirydd. We have seen the publication of the cancer improvement plan, which I think acknowledges the challenges ahead within the services, and, from the plan itself, it does look to focus on improvement within the cancer service. I think, because it's progressed in the way it has, it becomes more of a matter now for the health committee to investigate at a further date, including us as individual Members, to scrutinise the Government's plan. So, I would, at this point, suggest that we do close the petition and thank the petitioner for submitting the petition.

Luke, diolch yn fawr iawn. Finally, 4.7, P-06-1297, 'Stop "Controlled Burning" in Wales'. This was submitted by Maya James, with 604 signatures. And I'll bring Rhys ab Owen in to speak to this petition.

Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd. With this, we've had a detailed and helpful response from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds that recommends that we ask the Minister to review the regulations and the statutory code on controlled burning in Wales. I note that has been supported by the petitioner, and that would be my recommendation also.

Diolch, Rhys. Members agree? They do. Okay.

Well, that brings us ready for our next evidence session. And before that starts at three o'clock, I suggest we take a quick break and prepare for Dean Kirby from The i newspaper to be with us here online. Are Members content? They are. Therefore, we'll go into private session, and we'll start again at 3 p.m. Thank you. 

Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 14:53 a 15:00.

The meeting adjourned between 14:53 and 15:00.

15:00
5. Sesiwn dystiolaeth 2- P-06-1326 Dylai’r Senedd graffu ar y sgandal mesuryddion rhagdalu yng Nghymru
5. Evidence session 2 - P-06-1326 The Senedd should scrutinise the prepayment meter scandal in Wales

Okay. Can I welcome everybody back to the Senedd Petitions Committee this afternoon? We turn to item 5 on today's agenda, which is our second evidence session for the committee on our inquiry into petition P-06-1326, 'The Senedd should scrutinise the prepayment meter scandal in Wales'. Can I welcome to the committee, joining us online today, Dean Kirby, who's the investigations correspondent for The i paper? Dean, it's really good that you could be with us this afternoon. We appreciate your busy schedule, but also appreciate you being with us, to use this as an opportunity for us to learn a bit more about what the petitioners are calling a scandal.

We had a good session just a few moments ago with Bethan Sayed, who's the lead petitioner, the National Energy Action campaign and with Citizens Advice. We do have some questions from Members, but perhaps if I can start, Dean. We know that you've done months of very good work, I should say, and commendable work, in this field. Can I ask you how you first became aware of what the petitioners are calling a scandal? And also, what was the trigger for you to go out and investigate further? You've been a leading journalist on this. Why was that?

Thank you. Well, I first became interested in prepayment meters in October last year when it was clear to me that fuel prices were rising and there was a winter fuel crisis that was coming, and I realised that this was going to be one of the big stories of the winter. So, I decided to start looking into that and I really wanted to find out how the poorest people in the country might be affected by this issue. So, I started speaking to charities around the country and asking them about it—what they thought were the big issues, what they were most concerned about. And they all said prepayment meters—those were the two words that kept cropping up in these conversations I was having with them. And I remember quite clearly that one person said to me, 'When people lose their gas and electricity, it's not like camping out with Bear Grylls, and it's not really about the electricity and gas being lost, you lose every aspect of your life, really, when this happens. You can't cook a hot meal for your children. You can't wash their clothes for school. You can't have a shower for the job interview that you might have in the morning'. People were not able to contact the Department for Work and Pensions about their benefits because their mobile phone wasn't charged. So, it affects lives in lots of different ways, really. There were stories of people coming out of hospital and coming home to having no electricity, and people changing the way they use foodbanks, so, they were only going in to get cold food rather than things they would have to cook and heat up.

So, I wondered how to go about looking into it. There are two ways that people can be forced onto a prepayment meter. If you've already got a smart meter, you can be remotely flipped to prepay—most people don't know that. The other way of doing it is to go to court and get a warrant to force your way into a person's property to fit one. And I started looking into that side of it, because I thought that that was something that would be easy to look at with it being a court process, but I soon found out that that wasn't really the case. I started ringing around local magistrates' courts trying to find when the next hearings were being held, and nobody seemed to know. They would keep passing me on to another court, saying, 'Try there'. I think one court official even said, 'Don't bother going there, you're not going to get any information from it'. Some were saying, 'Well, you can't even go into these courts. They're behind closed doors, really. The cases are held in offices'. So, that was a big red flag to me immediately, and that was the starting point for it and I've been looking into it now for around four months.

Thank you for that overview. We are going to go into some questions, and Members might have questions specifically about the court experiences you had. What consistently surprises me is where—. Credit where credit's due, the UK Government have moved to some action on this now, but towards the end of last year, both them and Ofgem and the energy suppliers, were saying that, essentially, there was no problem with prepayment meters. But the conversations that you just explained there—you were phoning individuals, you were phoning charities, and the only thing that was coming out was 'prepayment meters'. This was a concern that people were raising with you and others, which has only happened, perhaps, because of The Times exposé and also, the work that you've done. I'll bring in Luke Fletcher now to start questions from Members, and we'll work around that way. Luke.

15:05

Diolch, Gadeirydd. In terms of your investigations, Dean, you've touched on it already around the impact it had had on people. I'm particularly keen to understand the impacts on vulnerable groups of people as well. You mentioned, of course, people not being able to shower for a job interview, and not being able to charge their phones. Could you elaborate on that?

Yes. Well, I kept in touch with the charities over the winter to see what cases they were dealing with, particularly a charity up in the north-east of England. So, I said to them, 'Well, what cases have you had just this week?' when the temperature was dropping, because we've had really quite a bad winter, haven't we? And there was one case that they told me about, which was a woman who was 39 weeks pregnant, and she had no gas or electricity, and she was unable to charge her mobile phone. So, if she went into labour, she wouldn't have been able to get any help. She was on her own, and she was five days away from her next universal credit payment, so there was no hope of her getting the electricity and gas back on. So, they had to go around and help her get back on supply.

Some cases, I spoke to personally. There was a woman in Liverpool, and she had an eight-month-old baby. They were going days without gas, and she said that the house was freezing cold, they were having to stay in bed to try and keep warm, and the baby came down with pneumonia and ended up in hospital. She said that it was the worst period in her life and she'd experienced homelessness, but she said that this was worse than that; it was so horrible for them all.

There was another case in London, and this was a woman who was at a foodbank when the men came and forced their way into her house. She was saying that, one morning, they woke up and her daughter had really cold hands, and she couldn't get her warm. She said that when she was in bed, she could hardly see her breathing, she could hardly monitor it. She was trying to keep her warm with a hot water bottle, and she said that that day, the daughter had the worst asthma attack that she had ever seen in her life. So, that was another thing. I think, more generally, she was saying that she couldn't use the oven anymore. She used to like cooking with the oven, but she felt that it was so expensive just to switch the oven on. So, it was affecting their lives just generally as well, and they were all trying to basically live in one room in the house to try and keep warm.

Then, there was another case as well where a son was alone in the house when they came, and he thought they were breaking in; she described him as being terrified. The neighbours rang her to say that they thought men were breaking into the house, so she came back, rushed back because of that. She said that the way she tried to handle it was by managing the blackouts during the day when she was at work, so that's what she felt she had to do. And she had a problem with her meter, so when the electricity—. If it did go off at night time, she said that she had to go to a neighbour to borrow a power bank to try and get the meter started again, because it wasn't just firing up like it was supposed to do. So, those are the key cases that I've looked into. Some of my other colleagues have spoken to people separately as well.

15:10

Thanks, Dean. It can't have been easy to speak to a lot of these people and hear about some of their cases. All this, of course, happening while energy companies and energy bosses are raking in billions. Disgusting, to be quite frank, Chair. I'll hand back to you.

If I could say, it's very difficult to get people to speak about this as well, because there is obviously a big stigma around debt, isn't there, and some people were saying that they were concerned that, if they speak out, they're going to have their children taken away from them, or some kind of punishment against them. So, some people speak anonymously. The worst cases speak anonymously, and I think that's an issue as well; these are really hidden people, in a way. A lot of them are in debt and they're on the fringes of society, really, and they're people with a lot of vulnerabilities, I suppose.

Thank you, Luke. Thank you, Dean. I too have had similar conversations with people who are clearly vulnerable—one of them, their husband is a veteran in the forces, suffers with post-traumatic stress disorder, suffers with more health issues, reconstructed ankles, and so on, and again, it stuns me to say that Ofgem have failed these individuals, when they are the ones who are meant to protect these individuals. And what you've described, and some of the things that I've heard directly as well, is that it's not just energy; this is a traumatic experience they're living and the trauma associated with it could be for years to come—perhaps much more expensive to the Government and these energy suppliers than if they had protected them in the first place.

Before I bring Rhys ab Owen in to talk about courts, we had this discussion in the last session—. Dean, you'll be aware, in the late 1990s, of the legislation for the water industry. I said to Bethan Sayed, the petitioner, that it was my view that, if you changed the word 'water' for perhaps 'energy' or 'gas and electric', you could perhaps read some of the same stories back in the 1990s that we're seeing today from the likes of yourselves and others. Do you think we're in a similar space to the 1990s, where there does need to be legislation and regulation from UK Government to protect vulnerable people?

I read something recently—it was a British Medical Journal article from the 1990s—and the situation does sound very, very similar, really, in terms of—. That was water companies putting limiting devices on people's pipes as well as disconnecting them, and there were stories about people not having proper personal hygiene because they were trying to save water, because they couldn't afford it or the taps were going off. So, it is a very similar issue. I think that water has been seen as something that is essential for life, whereas electricity and gas haven't been seen in the same way, and I do think that they should be seen like that, because they are so essential for modern life.

I think that this should be another watershed moment like that, really, in terms of making real changes. My worry is that the firms will sign up to a code of conduct and then it will be back on again. We'll move very quickly to the warrants starting again and then, I think before that happens, there needs to be real national debate, really, about this issue. There needs to be a debate about people's vulnerabilities and a new definition of what vulnerabilities are. Should it include financial vulnerabilities? Because all of these people being forced on to these meters are, you could argue, financially vulnerable. So, I think that, before anything happens, any changes, there really needs to be a proper debate about it; we can't rush in to doing anything that ends up going back to the way it has been.

15:15

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. First, probably quite a straightforward question: in your article at the beginning of December of last year, you highlighted the huge disparity with the courts, with the level of warrants. I take it that's because certain courts have been designated as the centralised court in a specific area to deal with them—is that correct?

That's correct. If, say, a customer contests a case, then that will go to their local court, but the Ministry of Justice has said that contesting a case is extremely rare, which is a real red flag in itself, I think. If they don't contest a case—there are lots of reasons why people don't contest them, which I could discuss as well—what happens is that the company is allocated a court, and all the cases that are not contested go there in bulk. So, it doesn't matter where the customer is in the country, it depends on the company. So, that's why, for example, you will see Swansea doing a large number of cases, whereas other courts in Wales are doing very few. I suspect that the ones that are doing very few are perhaps contested cases that have been done locally. But Swansea will probably be a court that's been allocated to either an energy company, or a debt agency, and—

So, if I'm a customer and I want to contest the warrant, firstly, I need to know that the warrant's being applied for, (2) I need to know in which court it's being heard and the date it's being heard, and (3) somehow I need to contact that court and reach the relevant courtroom for that contest to be heard, written, or I turn up, orally, at the right time, to contest the warrant application. Is that correct?

That's right. The way it works is that a customer will be sent a letter and then have 21 days to reply. And if they don't reply within that time, then the case just goes straight off to one of these courts, which could be hundreds of miles away from them. There's a real issue about that. I've seen one or two letters that were sent to customers, and they can be quite confusing. One of them that I looked at said, 'You have to apply to court if you want this case heard', and then, a few sentences down, it said, 'You don't have to go to court if you don't want to'. And then, on the back, it gave a list of courts that they could go to. So, this person was in Sheffield, and, on the list, there was a court on the Isle of Wight that was on there, there was another one in Truro, in Cornwall.

And this question about the Ministry of Justice saying that it's extremely rare for cases to be contested—and I said that that's a red flag—there's a real issue with people who are in debt, if they're getting letters left, right and centre from debt collectors, as people sometimes put their heads in the sand and don't open them. People who are vulnerable are not perhaps best—. They don't always understand what these letters mean, do they, and they might have other issues. They're sending these letters out, and saying, 'Right, 21 days, and then it's gone'; you don't really have much—

No. And you won't get any legal aid for this, and your local advice centre closed back in 2011, probably, so it's very difficult to know actually who to turn to for advice. But I just wanted to—. What struck me—. It didn't strike me the level of warrants these courts hear, because they hear a huge amount—speeding cases, and so on—and they churn through these cases very quickly. What struck me was the number within the time. I think you mentioned, in the courtroom you went to, nearly 500 in just short of four minutes, and that they didn't individually go through the cases; no names were read out, no facts were read out on specific cases. How on earth that complies with natural justice, I have no idea at all. What then surprised me was the Magistrates Association's response to your article, saying, 'Magistrates' hands are tied; it's for politicians to change the law'. Well, surely, magistrates, law officers, court clerks have a duty. They've taken an oath and they have a duty to properly scrutinise before making a decision. Without knowing a person's name or the facts of the case, to determine nearly 500 within three minutes, where no two cases are the same, to me seems absolutely illogical and in breach of their duty as legal officers. What safeguards would you expect courts to put in place? 

15:20

The Act that they use in court is called the Rights of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards) Act 1954. It's very outdated, and that really needs to be, I think, looked at to see whether it should be replaced, because it was from a time when these kinds of issues weren't there, really. When you go into court, it's all done over the telephone, so the warrant officer is not in court anymore, and they will phone up and give an oath and then say, 'None of these people are vulnerable. None of them need machines that require electricity for their health, like oxygen machines', and then the magistrates just sign it off. I can understand that magistrates are very limited in what they can do because of the Act, really, but they are able to ask questions. There's nothing to stop them from asking questions or postponing a hearing to another day while they get more information. So, there are things that they can do within the limits of the Act. 

What happens is that they get a spreadsheet that has information on it but, really, it's just a list of names and addresses. So, they don't get any information at all. And they very much rely on the oath that this debt agent is giving. But I think there's a potential problem with that, because if you have a debt agent who is saying 'I've got 500 cases here and none of these people are vulnerable', how does that person know everything about those cases? How could they say hand on heart that they are telling the truth? How do they—? 

And to take it a step further than that, of course, there's a huge conflict there, because it's to that officer's benefit to get these warrants passed. It'd be like a police officer giving an oath—which they have to do before giving evidence—and the magistrate just accepting it all on face value. It wouldn't happen in other areas within the criminal justice system, so I've no idea why it happens here when it comes to prepayment meters. But thank you ever so much; that's been very useful and enlightening for me. Thank you. 

Thank you, Chair, and thanks ever so much, Dean, for coming in this afternoon. It's been absolutely fascinating to hear what's been going on. I just wanted to pick your brains, because we heard earlier from National Energy Action Cymru, and they mentioned that the prepayment meter sector is—if I get the words right now—wholly unfit for purpose, but you've also highlighted that energy companies have said, 'Well, we need these, because if we don't have them, energy bills will rise'. And I just wanted to know a bit more about the rationale behind that statement from them, but then also what your thoughts are on alternatives, if that makes sense. 

Yes, I was thinking the other day, when we were talking about the 1990s, and the issue with water, I can imagine that water companies probably made very similar and strong arguments about water bills having to go up at that time. The way the energy firms have described it to me is that, within the price cap that Ofgem sets, there is an element within that that goes towards paying bad debt, I think. So, the argument was that if they don't have prepayment meters, then the bad debt will increase, and then the price cap will have to go up as a result of that. The price cap is going down, isn't it, though, at the moment, and it's due to possibly go down again in the summer. I don't really know the details of that, really—other people would be able to talk about how that works, because it's obviously a very complicated issue. But, in terms of alternatives, it's something I think other people are best placed to answer, really, better than me. 

15:25

I think, as I said before, we do need to have a real national debate on prepayment and look at how other countries deal with it, really. And also, like I said, there needs to be another assessment of vulnerability and what that means. So, before anything does happen, there needs to be lots of discussion around the issue, really.

Thank you, Dean. Thank you, Joel. I'll go to Buffy Williams in the Rhondda. 

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Dean, for joining us this afternoon. It's been really interesting listening to what you've got to say. We'll be inviting Ofgem and suppliers to join us at committee after Easter. What questions would you want us to ask them? And also, just quickly—I know you've touched on it in answering my colleagues' questions—what steps do you think should be taken by Governments, the regulator and energy suppliers to better protect the vulnerable households in Wales? Over the last fortnight, I've spoken to a young lady who came to a community project that I run, and she's really, really struggling with the prepayment meter that she has. One, she has no clue how it works, and that's a real, real worry for me.

Thank you. I think, for me personally, I'd like to see Ofgem be more proactive about releasing data. I put a freedom of information request in a while ago to ask what data they had, and they came back with a schedule of 80 different sets of data that they were monitoring, but they wouldn't release it because they said it was commercially sensitive. So, I think that we need to be more open about the data. Data collection in this area is actually a big problem. So, the Ministry of Justice doesn't have any kind of central record of what the companies do with these warrants once they are granted them, and it's treated as management data rather than statistics. So, it's very rough data, really. Also, companies self-report how many meters they install to Ofgem, but their data seems quite fluid, really. So, in the last few weeks, I've reported on figures for prepayment meter installs, but the companies gave one figure to Ofgem and then they gave figures to the Government and they seem to be different figures. One company has told me, 'Well, the figure we gave to the Government might have been right at the time, but it's different now. We've verified it differently'. So, there's a big issue around the data, and I think you can't get a handle on the picture, really, if you don't know properly how many of these things have been installed, and things like that.

On other things that I'd like to see happen, I mentioned the rights of entry Act being updated. I think they need to slow the process down. Magistrates need to be more aware of people's vulnerabilities—[Interruption.]

15:30

Two seconds, Dean. I think we may have a problem with our equipment in the Senedd. Sorry. So, we'll just pause for a moment. No, we seem to have sorted it. Apologies for that, Dean. 

It's okay. I think it needs to be easier for people to come off prepayment meters as well, because at the moment, it seems very difficult. Once you're on one you're kind of stuck on it. Also, you've probably got a lot of people who are moving into rental houses that have got prepayment meters in them already, and, if you're a vulnerable person, how do you get off the thing and get back on to the credit meter?

I think I'd like to see, as well, some health research done, so that we know what the effects of prepayment meters are on people's health, but also on children's education. When you go to the doctors, you get asked—there's a tick box—if you smoke cigarettes, but maybe, could they ask if you have a prepayment meter, if you have a respiratory illness—could that be part of the question, maybe? There should be more research into that, because we don't really know the full impact of these things, really. But, I think, overall, there needs to be a big debate about the issue.  

Thank you for that, Dean. I will draw—. We're just after half past three now. You've certainly left us with some interesting questions from our side and what we might recommend to the Welsh Government certainly around research. The Senedd, last Wednesday, unanimously backed a debate and motion on the prepayment meter scandal, and that's what the motion called out. It is quite clear, I think, to this Parliament that something needs to change, and, hopefully, our research into this and our inquiry into this petition will go some way towards doing that. Can I say, finally, though, in closing, that your journalistic enquiries into this and the reporting into this—? We want to thank you for all the work that you've done, because without you and others out there, this scandal could easily have gone unnoticed and those traumatic experiences could have happened to a number of more people, and the number already is far too large. 

On the point of logistics and what happens next from the committee's side, we will, as I said earlier, be inviting Ofgem to committee; we will be inviting energy suppliers to committee. I'll say it again: I hope that they take this inquiry as seriously as we do in the Welsh Parliament. You'll get a transcript of what's happened this afternoon. Please, check that for factual accuracy, and if there are any amendments to be made, we can make those through the clerking team. We may have further questions throughout our work, and we'd be grateful, perhaps, if we could write to you on the back of them, and, likewise, if there are questions that pop up that you think we should be asking, or certainly if there's something that you want to highlight to us, please, feel free to get in touch. But, to end and close this evidence session, again, I'd like to to say thanks for all you do, and thanks for taking the time to share that experience with us this afternoon. Diolch yn fawr. 

6. Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42(ix) i benderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod
6. Motion under Standing Order 17.42(ix) to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting

Cynnig:

bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42(ix).

Motion:

that the committee resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix).

Cynigiwyd y cynnig.

Motion moved.

Okay. Well, that does conclude today's public business. We will go into private session now to discuss the two evidence sessions we've heard this afternoon. Can I, therefore, propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix), that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of today's meeting? Are Members content? They are. We will meet again on 24 April, when we will have invited Ofgem and energy suppliers to give evidence to our committee on this topic, then. Diolch yn fawr. Meeting closed. 

Derbyniwyd y cynnig.

Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 15:34. 

Motion agreed.

The public part of the meeting ended at 15:34.