Why ‘warm banks’ shouldn't become a permanent fixture in our country like food banks - Jayne Dowle

The fast-food restaurant has around 1,270 UK branches. There are 1,400 Trussell Trust food banks in the UK and at least 1,172 independent food banks, says the House of Commons – so more than double the number.

No wonder - all too rapidly - ‘food bank’ has entered the language. If not exactly taken for granted, food banks have become an accepted part of the social welfare system.

Whilst food banks, typically staffed by volunteers, offer millions of food parcel lifelines every day to those who rely on them, are admirable, it is a crying shame that in a civilised Western country we need them at all.

Which is why I reacted warily to the news that out of 355 councils in England and Wales, 194 are directly involved in or supporting local groups to open ‘warm banks’, as the cost of living crisis plunges millions into fuel poverty.

I can only pray that free-to-enter heated spaces in public buildings such as community centres and libraries do not become so commonplace that we end up with ‘warm banks’ as another unwelcome addition to the lexicon of poverty.

I agree with Dan Paskins, director of UK impact at the charity Save The Children, who says that the need for ‘warm banks’ is totally unacceptable: “What an extraordinary sign of the times we are in that communities and councils are setting up warm spaces because so many people won’t be able to heat their homes this winter.”

The total number of ‘warm banks’ is expected to run into the thousands and have already been set up across our region.

In Leeds there are 36 so far, including the Jamyang Buddhist Centre and St Andrew’s Church in Beeston. In Bradford, the Industrial Museum and Bolling Hall Museum will open their doors, reminding people perhaps that the deprivation and division suffered by workers in the city’s industrial past is back to haunt us once more. And in Knaresborough, there’s a ‘public living rooms’ programme which sees people in need able to access warm spaces with board games and tea available.

In the UK, we have some of the finest minds at the forefront of energy for homes and businesses, academic experts in not just architecture and sustainability, but economics and social impact.

Their insight and ideas could steer the government towards creating authentic and impactful solutions that would help everyone manage the cost of home energy, but all too often their expertise is overlooked or disregarded.

And meanwhile, we are all facing the cold, hard truth of autumn and winter 2022.

This morning, I spent half an hour contemplating my latest email from EDF, my energy supplier, which informs me that a family with two adults and one teenager, has managed to somehow rack up a weekly gas and electricity bill of £113 in the first week of November.

This bill represents a typical family house with the central heating barely flicked on and certainly not every day, a log burner and every other meal cooked in a slow cooker. I work from home wrapped in three layers and a blanket, and in the evenings, the dog is welcome on the sofa as he helps to keep us warm. And we’ve not even had a frost yet.

I’m keen to find out if this terrifying three-figure seven-day sum represents some kind of catch-up or readjustment on the part of my supplier, which is known for its quixotic approach to producing bills.

But what if it isn’t? I’ve studied the tripling of the unit price for gas since my fixed deal came to an end in September, and I’m having doubts it’s an error.

So, it’s true, we could be looking at £500 a month for our home energy by December. And that’s before any further price rises.

As we know, the elderly, the vulnerable and those on low incomes are in particular peril, especially if they find themselves paying for their home energy on an even more expensive pay as you go meter.

All of us, however, except possibly the very wealthy, will count the cost of energy price rises this year, in homes which are freezing, damp and detrimental to physical and mental health.

It is morally irresponsible on the part of the government to allow this to happen, to refuse to hold energy companies to account, and to waffle on in Westminster whilst warm banks are ending up as the only answer.