Question
Echoing concerns raised by Members across the House, I ask the Minister to imagine an elderly constituent living alone in an isolated Lake district valley where copper phonelines have been replaced with fibre; a storm takes out the power to their router in the night, and by the time that they wake, the modest battery back-up has failed, as has the mobile mast. Does the Minister share my concerns that they would have no way to raise an alarm in an emergency, and agree that we need a new technological solution to protect the elderly?
Answer
I absolutely share my hon. Friend’s concern, but I would again take this opportunity to emphasise the importance of the priority services register.50% vibes
Verdict: AMBER (58/100)
The Minister clearly and directly said they share the concern raised, which answers the first part of the question. On the second part, whether a new technological solution is needed, the reply does not state the Government's position. It points instead to the existing priority services register without saying whether that is considered sufficient, so the questioner would probably need to ask again for a direct answer.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Minister shares the concern that an elderly person living alone in an isolated area, after a power cut and mobile mast failure, would have no way to raise an alarm in an emergency, now that copper phone lines have been replaced with fibre. | Addressed | Direct | The reply directly answers whether the Minister shares the concern by stating "I absolutely share my hon. Friend's concern", which is the clear, specific answer the item asks for. The priority services register point in statement 2 is a concrete existing protection, though it is aimed more at item 2. |
| Whether the Government agrees that a new technological solution is needed to protect the elderly in this situation. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The reply never says whether the Government agrees a new technological solution is needed. It redirects to the existing priority services register, which implicitly suggests no new solution is required, but it does not state this position or give a reason. |