CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 2 February 2012

‘Clean Air in London’ calls on all the Mayoral candidates to promise in their manifestos to end the biggest public health crisis for decades

We need a Mayor who will: Lead the fight to improve London’s air; Clean up London’s transport; Build a low emission city; Protect the most vulnerable; and Ensure a legacy from the Olympic Games

Clean Air in London intends to rank Mayoral candidates on their commitment to measures in this manifesto before the Mayoral election

London should lead the world in tackling air pollution as it did after the Great Smog of 1952

Clean Air in London, which runs the cross-party campaign of the same name, has published its manifesto for the Mayoral and London Assembly elections on 3 May 2012.

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“London is back where we thought it was during the Great Smog of 1952.

“Boris Johnson says there were 4,267 early deaths in London in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to ‘invisible’ air pollution (at an average of 11.5 years each). This compares to 4,075 due to short-term exposure during the ‘visible’ Great Smog of 1952 when we knew nothing of the health impact of long-term exposure to air pollution. Only smoking causes more early deaths now.

“The Mayor must protect the health of Londoners and ensure full compliance with UK and European air quality laws throughout London. We need a Mayor who will:

• Lead the fight to improve London’s air by championing the tightening of health and legal protections, ensuring good governance and improving public understanding of poor air quality
• Clean up London’s transport by reducing traffic emissions, cleaning up the public transport system, reducing emissions from non-road mobile machinery and supporting active travel
• Build a low emission city by using planning powers and other opportunities to reduce emissions from buildings and improve indoor air quality
• Protect the most vulnerable through a focus on children, the elderly, the poor and ethnic minorities
• Ensure a legacy from the Olympic Games by delivering a low emission Olympics and more

“Clean Air in London is therefore calling on all the Mayoral candidates to promise in their manifestos to end the biggest public health crisis for decades. After four years of backward steps on air quality measures, Boris is well behind on this issue.

“We need a Mayor who will show the world, starting with the Olympics, that London is leading the way in tackling air pollution as it did after the Great Smog of 1952.”

Notes:

1. Titled ‘Manifesto for ‘clean air in London’’, the manifesto lists five themes, 12 key policy areas and 45 measures needing to taken by the Mayor and London Assembly over the next four years.

2. Kulveer Ranger, the Mayor’s Director of Environment and Digital London, is due to give evidence on 2 February 2012 to the London Assembly Environment Committee about key environmental priorities for London over the coming years:

http://www.london.gov.uk/media/press_releases_london_assembly/week-ahead-london-assembly-74

3. Defra forecasts for air pollution in London

http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/latest/?zone_id=15&Submit=View&type=forecast


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 1 January 2011

The most-read stories of 2010

A look back at the campaign letters and updates that proved the most popular of the year.

January

Mayor’s Transport Strategy is not yet ‘fit for purpose’. Clean Air in London calls for WEZ to remain and Phase 3 of LEZ to go ahead unless air quality impacts are fully offset

February

Government tells ‘Clean Air in London’ ‘there has not been a cover-up’ on air quality premature deaths

March

Air quality: fairer and more ambitious CO2 Charge needed

April

Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee unearths over a decade of government failings or ‘cover-ups’ over air quality premature deaths

May

‘Clean Air in London’ wins at Information Tribunal after Government Counsel admits Tribunal’s ruling means ‘it does not have much of an appeal left’

June

Removing western extension of congestion charging zone is ‘daftest’ of Mayor’s ‘daft’ transport policies

July

Mayor Johnson publishes health study with breakdown by ward across London of his estimate of 4,267 premature deaths in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles

August

Campaign for Better Transport, Clean Air in London, ClientEarth, Environmental Protection UK and Friends of the Earth condemn Mayor of London’s proposal to remove the western extension of the congestion charging zone and argue consultation is invalid

September

Mayor Johnson draft Air Quality Strategy is still not ‘fit for purpose’

October

‘Bad Air Day (B.A.D.) for particles’ as PM10 daily limit value is first breached in London in 2010 as ‘Clean Air in London’ rejects Mayor proposal to postpone Phase 3 of low emission zone (LEZ3) until 3 January 2012

November

‘Clean Air in London’ welcomes first official confirmation that calculations suggesting as many as 35,000 to 50,000 premature deaths per year can be attributed to long-term exposure to fine particles are correct

December

An introduction to poor air quality in London

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 1 January 2010

The most-read stories of 2009

A look back at the campaign letters and updates that proved the most popular of the year.

January

Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has a legal duty to ensure air quality limit values are attained and not exceeded once attained

February

Leading NGOs call for Government commitment to comply fully with Air Quality laws

March

Government maps show action is needed urgently if UK is to avoid breaching health based air quality laws for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a toxic gas, in London from 2010 to 2015 and beyond

April

Latest research suggests 2,900 premature deaths each year in London due to dangerous airborne particles (PM10): nearly three times earlier estimates

May

Air quality: Fairer and more ambitious CO2 charge needed

June

A warning to London 2012 Olympics as Defra issues ‘First “summer smog” of 2009 alert’ with research highlighting premature deaths during August 2003 smog ‘event’

July

UK does not satisfy any of the three conditions for a time extension to comply with limit values for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London

August

‘Every Breath You Take’: an investigation into air quality by the London Assembly’s Environment Committee

September

Mayor Johnson urged to apply Precautionary Principle for Air Quality Strategy assuming 6,300 to 7,900 premature deaths in London in 2005 due to dangerous airborne particles (PM10)

October

Verdict on Mayor Johnson’s draft Air quality Strategy: It’s a start but not yet ‘fit for purpose’

November

Mayor Johnson has a statutory duty to ensure his Air Quality Strategy includes policies and proposals for the achievement of the air quality standards

December

‘Clean Air in London’ applauds European Commission’s decision to reject UK’s application to delay compliance with health based laws for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 16 January 2009

The most-read stories of 2008

A look back at the campaign letters and updates that proved the most popular of the year.

March

Campaign supporters

April

Conditional support for new EU air quality law

May

'Clean Air in London' hails Lord Coe's air quality vision for London 2012

June

New European Union Directive on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe entered into force on 11 June 2008

July

New air quality laws require one-third less air pollution in London within 18 months

August

Leading NGOs call for Government commitment to comply fully with air quality laws

September

Government must submit to the European Commission by 31 October 2008 plans to eliminate breaches of air quality laws for particulate matter along 40 kilometres of London roads across 13 boroughs by 2011 or face legal action

October

Keep the Congestion Charge Western Extension or an even tougher, additional, inner Low Emission Zone will be needed by early 2010

November

Campaign for Clean Air in London urges the European Commission to launch legal action against the UK now for breaching EU air quality limit values for particulate matter (PM10)

December

Government set to breach reporting laws with no plans to comply with EU air quality limit values for nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

Tweet


   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 16 January 2012

Top lung scientists have warned a “Summer Smog” could affect Olympic athletes in London

Levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in London are comparable with those in Beijing before it acted to ensure the success of the 2008 Olympics

Mayor must take action so London leads the world in tackling air pollution as it did after the Great Smog of 1952

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“Top UK lung scientists are warning that a “Summer Smog”, like August 2003 or July 2006, could affect Olympic athletes in London this summer.

“If we have still hot days, long distance athletes, like marathon runners and cyclists who breathe very hard, could feel a tightness in their chest or experience ‘coughs, breathlessness or other problems’. Those with asthma may need medication. Athletic performance could be affected.

“It’s not just about Olympic athletes though. In the “Summer Smog” of 2003, the Government estimated 46 to 212 early deaths in London attributable to ozone and 85 attributable to short-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles (PM10).

“Beijing has much higher levels of airborne particles than London but London has the highest levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) of all 27 capital cities in Europe and levels comparable with those in Beijing before it took action to ensure the success of the 2008 Olympics.

“In the past, some cities like Beijing and Athens have used an ‘odd and even’ number plate ban to reduce harmful traffic emissions. Others, like Sydney have used the ‘Big Scare’ tactic which plays ‘mind games’ with drivers to keep them away from traffic ‘hotspots’.

“Surely London can do better than that. The Mayor should ban the most polluting diesel vehicles from the most polluted parts of London during the Games and keep an inner scheme in place as a legacy. The longer he delays, the more disruption he’ll cause. At this late stage, it looks like that or a last minute ‘odd and even’ number plate ban.

“Six hundred of the biggest retailers and property owners in the West End are calling for a stricter vehicle emission zone in central London by May 2013 for vehicles over 3.5 tonnes. It is beginning to look like the Mayor is the only obstacle to action.

“We were promised the greenest Games ever. London should deliver it by leading the world in tackling air pollution as we did after the Great Smog of 1952.”


The Independent

Polluted air ‘puts Olympic athletes at risk’ (16 January 2012)

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/polluted-air-puts-olympic-athletes-at-risk-6290216.html

Evening Standard

Retailers back stricter emission zone (16 January 2012)

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24028065-retailers-back-stricter-emission-zone.do

Clean Air in London articles

1. London 2012: No air quality plans to be the greenest Games ever (17 January 2008)

http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2008/3/29/3609596.html

2. A warning to London 2012 Olympics as Defra issues its ‘First “Summer smog” of 2009 alert’ with research highlight the number of premature deaths during August 2003 smog ‘event’ (2 June 2009)

http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2009/6/2/4207997.html

3. Consultation shows Olympic Transport Plan would lead to breaches of air pollution laws (11 April 2011)

http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2011/4/12/4792164.html

4. Plans for Olympic Route Network and Paralympic Route Network remain unlawful and vulnerable to legal challenge through judicial review (12 September 2011)

http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2011/9/12/4898123.html

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 3 January 2012

Environmental Information Request shows Mayor Johnson is failing to warn Londoners and may be actively seeking to mislead us about the biggest public health crisis since the Great Smog of 1952. 4,000 early deaths in 1952 changed the world but 4,000 in the Olympic year are considered 'room for improvement'

Mayor Johnson’s response to this invisible crisis has been a succession of backward steps on air quality including the 15 month postponement of Phase 3 of Mayor Livingstone’s planned low emission zone. Phase 3 was designed to protect over 15% of those most exposed to air pollution

London, as the Olympic City, should be leading the world. Instead its low emission zone is still two steps and two years behind the ‘quick and inexpensive to implement’ Berlin equivalent

Mayor Johnson is implementing Phases 3 and 4 of the London low emission zone (LEZ) on 3 January 2012 to ban more of the most polluting diesel vehicles from Greater London. Further details can be seen on Transport for London’s (TfL’s) website:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“You wouldn’t know it if you listen to Mayor Johnson or the Government, but London – the Olympic City – is in the midst of the biggest public health crisis since the Great Smog of 1952. Only smoking is likely to cause more early deaths than air pollution in London.

“There were as many early deaths attributable to long-term exposure to air pollution in London in 2008 (i.e. 4,267) as we thought occurred during the Great Smog due to short-term exposure (4,075) when we knew nothing about the health impact of long-term exposure. Scientists have only known about the impacts of long-term exposure for about 10 years. Some estimates suggest one in three Londoners dying every year are losing on average an additional three years of life due to air pollution.

“Mayor Johnson’s response to this invisible crisis has been a succession of backward steps on air quality measures including the 15 month postponement of Phase 3 of the low emission zone (LEZ). Phase 3 alone, developed with the rest of the LEZ by Mayor Livingstone in 2006 and 2007, was designed to protect over 15% of the Londoners most exposed to air pollution. Its launch today with Phase 4 is a long overdue step to improve public health in London and reduce social and economic inequalities from traffic-related air pollution.

“To cap it all, an Environmental Information Request by ‘Clean Air in London’ has found Mayor Johnson judges air pollution by what he can see rather than what we know it is doing to Londoners’ health. Very oddly, the Mayor’s officials have been seeking a ‘commitment’ from potential partners to ‘push’ similar themes and provide ‘evidence to demonstrate activity’. Why is it that 4,000 early deaths in 1952 changed the world but 4,000 in the Olympic year – at an average statistical loss of life of 11.5 years – are considered ‘room for improvement’? Is it simply the difference between short-term exposure to visible air pollution then and long-term exposure to invisible air pollution now? What about the discovery by leading scientists in 2010 that traffic-related air pollution may be causing 15-30% of all new cases in asthma in children?

“Even after the latest changes, London’s LEZ is still two steps and two years behind the Berlin low emission zone that has banned pre-Euro 4 diesel vehicles of all sorts from the most polluted parts of the city. The Germans say it has been ‘the most effective single measure in Berlin’ to improve air quality. Mayoral candidates should commit to introduce quickly a Berlin-type low emission zone in central and inner London and tighten further the existing (outer) low emission zone. A tighter inner low emission zone, long championed by Darren Johnson AM (Green) and Mike Tuffrey AM (Liberal Democrat), would be ‘quick and inexpensive to implement’ according to Transport for London and would avoid the need to: introduce the tightest standards throughout London; and/or affect all vehicles.

“London should be leading the world in tackling air pollution as it did after the Great Smog of 1952 not failing to warn or misleading Londoners about this invisible public health crisis.”

Low emission zone

Air pollution in London is much worse than most of us have realised.

According to the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy 2010, road transport contributed around 80% of emissions of the most dangerous airborne particles (PM2.5) in Greater London in 2008 (page 41). According to the Department for Transport, diesel transit size vans produce 24.4 times the PM10 emissions and 20% more oxides of nitrogen than their petrol equivalent (in grams/mile). Most, larger vehicles, and around 50% of new passenger vehicles, use diesel engines.

There are two main approaches to tackling traffic related air pollution: emission measures and congestion measures. A low emission zone (LEZ) targets harmful vehicle emissions at their source and may have a secondary benefit of reducing congestion. It contrasts with: congestion measures, which require road users to pay a daily charge and may have a secondary benefit of reducing harmful emissions; and ‘dust suppressants’ or ‘green walls’ that seek to remove emissions from the air. Unlike congestion charging, there is no daily charge once a vehicle complies with an LEZ standard.

The London LEZ requires certain vehicles to meet a minimum theoretical standard equivalent to the Euro 3 or Euro 4 engine emission standard for particulate matter i.e. a vehicle does not need to have a Euro 3 or Euro 4 engine per se. In practice, because of the vehicle size thresholds, only diesel vehicles are affected. For the largest vehicles these standards are called Euro III and Euro IV.

Phases 1 and 2 of the London LEZ entered into force on 4 February and 7 July 2008 respectively. Phase 3 of the LEZ includes for the first time larger vans, and minibuses registered as new before 1 January 2002. Phase 4 tightens existing standards for lorries, buses and coaches registered as new before 1 October 2006.

Phase 3, which was designed by Mayor Livingstone in 2006 and 2007 to protect over 15% of those most exposed to air pollution, was postponed by Mayor Johnson from 4 October 2010. Mayor Johnson expected the postponement of Phase 3 of the LEZ to result in exhaust emissions of dangerous airborne particles (PM10) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) being higher by 10 tonnes and 340 tonnes respectively mainly in 2010.

Vehicle operators have several options including: purchasing a new or second-hand vehicle; fitting a diesel particulate filter approved by TfL; paying a daily fine; hiring a vehicle; or not driving in the zone.

Environmental Information Request

A response to an Environmental Information Request dated 15 December 2011 shows TfL seeking partners ‘to deliver Cleaner Air for London’. The opening paragraph of the proposal says:

“The Mayor wants London to be one of the cleanest, greenest cities in the world to ensure that people living here enjoy a great quality of life. The Mayor recognises that poor air quality has an adverse effect on people’s health and wellbeing. London’s air quality is hugely better than it was 50 years ago but there’s still room for improvement”.

Later it says:

Key messages
• London’s air quality is hugely better than it was 50 years ago but there is still room for improvement
• Together we can help London breathe better – turn off your engine when parked or when picking up and dropping off people or goods

What we can offer you
We are still exploring options for marketing and awareness raising, however some of the exposure opportunities we can offer include:

• Possible logo/branding opportunities on our marketing collateral (e.g. posters across Greater London)
• Media launch with the Mayor (or Mayoral representative)
• Regular media and social media activity across the period of the campaign
• Potential for web links/inclusion of organisation and key messages in web copy
• Possible use of campaign logo/brand
• Possible access to celebrity campaign advocates

What we seek in return
• Access to spokespeople, advocates and supportive quotes for media use
• Commitment to push campaign messages to own audiences, and evidence to demonstrate activity
• Supportive parallel communications activity
• Case studies

CAL emphasis.


Tweet

 

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 21 December 2011


Court of Appeal decision: Government keeps new right to ‘rely as of right’ upon a different exception or exceptions in proceedings before the Information Commissioner and/or the First-tier Tribunal for refusing to disclose environmental information

‘Clean Air in London’ considers the judgment not fully consistent with the need for urgency implicit in case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Birkett seeking advice on whether to challenge the Court of Appeal’s decision or return quickly to the First-tier Tribunal to continue the fight against Defra’s appeal against the Information Commissioner’s decision that it must release all the information requested

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London (CAL), attended personally the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) on 28 and 29 November 2011. This case has implications for the Information Commissioner and every person who requests environmental information in future.

Birkett appealed against a judgment by the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) that the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) could ‘rely as of right’ on a different exception or exceptions in proceedings before the Information Commissioner and/or the First-tier Tribunal for refusing to disclose environmental information subject to any case management direction or decision under the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (SI No 1976). The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal today. The Judgment can be seen at:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1606.html

The Information Commissioner joined Birkett in opposing Defra at the First-tier Tribunal. At the Upper Tribunal the Information Commissioner argued for a ‘middle way’ whereby he and/or the First-tier Tribunal had a discretion whether to allow reliance on a different exception or exceptions. He chose not to appear at the Court of Appeal. Birkett has argued that the deadlines are mandatory.

Birkett was represented by Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John of Monckton Chambers and Gita Parihar and Laura Gyte of Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice team.

Birkett said:

“The appeal was an important part of an ongoing three-year battle with Defra to obtain environmental information relating to discussions between the previous Government and the Mayor of London on matters of air pollution and the UK’s compliance with European Union air quality laws.

“Environmental information laws are very powerful. It is disappointing therefore that Defra has been able so far to: miss unlawfully both mandatory deadlines to respond to the request for disclosure of environmental information; fail to rely on the correct exception or exceptions for withholding the information (which would anyway have required a balancing of public interest); and then come up with new reasons for refusing to disclose the information – after the Information Commissioner had ruled against it. I am seeking advice on whether to challenge the Court of Appeal’s decision or return quickly to the First-tier Tribunal to continue the fight against Defra’s appeal against the Information Commissioner’s decision that it must release all the information requested.

“I remain of the view that the information Defra is still withholding may include an admission that the UK is in breach of EU air quality laws for dangerous airborne particles in London.

“Last but not least, I wish to thank my tremendous legal team, which includes barristers Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John from Monckton Chambers and Gita Parihar and Laura Gyte from Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice team. They have generously provided pro bono advice throughout.”


Tweet


Chronology

2009

22 January: Birkett requests information relating to discussions between the previous Government and the Mayor of London on matters of air pollution and the UK’s compliance with European Union air quality laws
1 April: Defra refuses disclosure on grounds information is ‘internal communications’
1 May: Birkett requests ‘Internal review’ by Defra
15 September: Defra refuses disclosure on grounds information is ‘internal communications’
3 October: Birkett complains to the Information Commissioner
2 November: Information Commissioner orders Defra to release all information requested. Defra complains the Information Commissioner did not wait for its response to the complaint, but the Information Commissioner was not obliged to do so
1 December: Defra appeals to First-tier Tribunal seeking to rely on the new exceptions of ‘legal advice privilege’ and ‘litigation privilege’ to withhold the information
24 December: Defra releases first tranche of information

2010

11 March: Defra releases second tranche of information
8 April: Defra release third tranche of information
11 May: First-tier Tribunal hearing. Tribunal refuses to allow new exceptions and ‘stays’ the case pending any appeal
Tribunal concluded, before the main hearing got underway, that:

“There is no obligation on the Tribunal to consider any new exception relied upon by a public authority that had not previously been relied upon; exceptions or exemptions raised for the first time before the Tribunal should only be considered if there is a reasonable justification.”

Defra barrister admits in Court the decision means ‘it does not have much of an appeal left’
15 July Defra appeals to Upper Tribunal

2011

12 and 13 January: Upper Tribunal hearing
26 January: Upper Tribunal judgment
28 February: Birkett applies for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal
28 and 29 November: Court of Appeal hearing
21 December: Court of Appeal judgment

The case has now been referred back to the First-tier Tribunal subject to any appeal.


   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 14 November 2011

No Parliamentary Select Committee can ever have published a more damning report of a Government’s failure to protect its people from harm

CAL welcomes the EAC’s blistering attack on the Government for failing to act on the biggest public health crisis since the Great Smog of 1952 and its stinging criticism of the Mayor’s failure to ‘make the required policy trade-offs and achieve acceptable levels of air quality’. The Mayor also deserves the ridicule he gets for ‘spraying the roads with adhesive’

Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) says 4,000 people died as a result of the Great Smog of London in 1952 and 4,000 died in London, the Olympic City, in 2008 from air pollution. Only smoking causes more early deaths

CAL has found unlawful levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in up to 75 marginal Parliamentary constituencies and 24 London boroughs in 2010. Preliminary results for England indicate that poor air quality is associated with areas of low income, low employment and lower education attainment, with differences in exposure to air pollution between different ethnic groups

CAL has evidence the Government has not considered the glaring socio-economic impacts of this public health crisis. CAL has instructed its solicitors, Harrison Grant, to investigate Defra’s failure to ‘hold any information on a race equality impact assessment for NO2’

‘Clean Air in London’ (CAL) welcomes the hard-hitting report from Parliament’s powerful Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) titled ‘Air quality: A follow up report’.

The EAC undertook the inquiry to assess the extent to which the Government had implemented the processes outlined in its November 2010 response to the EAC’s report on air quality in March 2010 and to assess their results.

Volume I and Volume II (containing unprinted written evidence) of the EAC’s report are available on the Committee’s website at:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environmental-audit-committee/news/air-quality-a-follow-up-report/

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London (CAL), said:

“No Parliamentary Select Committee can ever have published a more damning report of a Government’s failure to protect its people from harm. Further, CAL has found hard evidence the Government has not considered the glaring socio-economic impacts of this invisible public health crisis.

“The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) rightly says 4,000 people died as a result of the Great Smog of London in 1952 and 4,000 died in London, the Olympic City, in 2008 from air pollution. Only smoking causes more early deaths. Alcoholism and obesity trail far behind.

“Air pollution has reduced since the 1950s so there are fewer deaths now due to short-term exposure to it. However, since the mid-1990s and more recently scientists have discovered that the health impacts due to long-term exposure to air pollution dwarf those due to short-term exposure. As a result, we know there are more early deaths now in London due to air pollution than we thought occurred in the Great Smog of 1952. We now also have the first causal links between traffic-related air pollution and asthma that may account for up to 30% of all new cases of asthma in children.

“Preliminary results for England indicate that poor air quality is associated with areas of low income, low employment and lower education attainment, with differences in exposure to air pollution between different ethnic groups. CAL which saw these results, from work done by Imperial College’s highly respected Small Area Health Statistics Unit (SASHU), presented at the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology (ISEE) conference in Barcelona on 16 September 2011 recollects that the worst effected groups were exposed to up to 50% more NO2 than those least effected i.e. the health inequalities linked to combustion related air pollutants are up to twice those for PM10. The research presented in Barcelona was titled “Associations between small area levels of air pollution and socio-economic characteristics in the Netherlands and England”. CAL hopes the SAHSU will publish its results shortly and/or release copies of the slides presented at the public conference in Barcelona.

“CAL wrote to the Defra Secretary of State on 2 August 2011 requesting details inter alia of any Racial Equality Impact Assessment undertaken by Defra for NO2. Defra replied on 31 August confirming that an ‘integrated’ impact assessment and racial equality impact assessment had not been carried out and that it held no ‘documentation’ with respect to CAL’s request. CAL wrote to Defra again on 11 October having attended the ISEE conference in Barcelona in the intervening period expressing grave concerns regarding omissions in the consultation. After a further unsatisfactory response, CAL has instructed its solicitors, Harrison Grant, to investigate Defra’s failure to ‘hold any information on a race equality impact assessment for NO2’ and related matters. It is very odd that no such study has been undertaken for NO2 not least given that one was undertaken for PM10 in August 2009.

“CAL welcomes and will inform the European Commission that one of Parliament’s most powerful Committees has said “We can see no circumstances in which a delay in achieving [EU limit value] targets or a lessening of these targets would be acceptable”. CAL will also bring to the Commission’s attention that the UK:

• has unlawfully obtained a time extension to comply with the PM10 daily limit value in London; and
• is trying to create a legal loophole – where none exists – by submitting a so-called ‘short-term plan’ to comply with NO2 limit values in London, that would miss by up to 15 years the legal deadline that has been in legislation since 1999, instead of applying for a time extension (which could only be granted subject to strict conditions including ensuring compliance with the limit value plus margin of tolerance).

“CAL supports wholeheartedly the EAC’s recommendations which include setting up a Cabinet Office lead Ministerial Group to oversee delivery of a new cross government air quality strategy. Only the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister have the authority to respond to and accept the EAC’s report and recommendations. They must do so urgently.

“Last but not least, CAL wishes to record its thanks particularly to: Joan Walley (Chair, Labour), Zac Goldsmith (Conservative), Caroline Lucas (Green) and Simon Wright (Liberal Democrat) and the other members of the EAC. Also to officials Simon Fiander (Committee Clerk), Edward White (Second Clerk), Nick Davies (Media Officer) and Jill Herring (Committee Assistant) for their outstanding contributions to this inquiry.”


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 15 October 2011


Mayor of London ‘found out’ after looking – yet again – for a loophole to avoid compliance with air quality laws

Eight wins for ‘Clean Air in London’ in new London Plan (and five letters between lawyers). Key themes for campaigners, developers, the Mayor and local authorities

Restrictions on development in the most polluted parts of London unless: the Mayor acts to reduce sharply harmful emissions from road transport; and developers act to reduce harmful emissions from buildings

Mayor and local authorities need to consider carefully whether they could be held ‘culpable’ for allowing any development that would increase: air pollution near people; and/or the number of people, particularly vulnerable people or housing, near air pollution


Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“The Mayor has been ‘found out’ looking – yet again – for a loophole to avoid compliance with air quality laws. The Mayor should not be undermining protections in the new London Plan that are needed to improve public health.

“It is ridiculous of the Mayor to propose a definition of ‘air quality neutral’ in the Glossary to the London Plan which is consistent with increases in pollution. Further:

• his wording is inconsistent with the London Plan and the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy; and
• it is unclear when, how and with whom any consultation on the wording was carried out.

“Even the Mayor’s own ‘Air Quality’ Policy highlights [paragraph 7.49] the need to consult on guidance before it is published as ‘supplementary guidance to the London Plan’.

“The Mayor should be spending his time addressing the biggest public health crisis in nearly 60 years not continually looking for loopholes to avoid legal standards that were put in legislation for dangerous airborne particles and nitrogen dioxide in 1999 to be met by 2005 and 2010 respectively.

“The good news is that – perhaps in part as a result of Clean Air in London publishing an initial list of schools near London’s busiest roads shortly before the Examination in Public hearing on Air Quality in September 2010 – the London Plan includes eight protections on air quality for Londoners.

"These include:

1. Air pollution must be reduced
2. Special protections for vulnerable people
3. No increase in air pollution near people
4. No increase in the number of people near air pollution
5. Demolition and construction practices must be improved
6. Off-setting is not equitable or sustainable and will be difficult to justify
7. Indoor air quality must be given a higher priority to reduce people’s exposure to pollution
8. No more biomass boilers in London

“These issues matter. One in three Londoners are dying on average an additional three years early due to long-term exposure to air pollution; air pollution is over twice legal limits near our busiest roads; inequalities are likely to be worsened by air pollution; and London faces fines of up to £300m per year for failing to comply with air quality laws until 2025. This is totally unacceptable.

“The Mayor and local authorities need to consider carefully whether they could be held culpable for allowing any development that would increase: air pollution near people; and/or the number of people near air pollution. In this regard, the London Plan now offers particular protections for those susceptible to air pollution such as the vulnerable or those in housing.

“Whether we’re talking about air quality laws or the London Plan, future development in London will be restricted in the most polluted parts of London unless: the Mayor acts to reduce sharply harmful emissions from road transport; and developers act to reduce harmful emissions from buildings.

“The Mayor should define ‘air quality neutral’ sensibly, provide guidance on delivering it as a minimum and consult on his approach.”


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 6 September 2011

Camfil Farr UK becomes the first Gold Sponsor of Clean Air in London

New campaign to build public understanding of the dangers of indoor air quality, initially in London, with advice for people on protecting themselves and reducing pollution


Camfil Farr in the UK has become the first Gold Sponsor of Clean Air in London (CAL).

Camfil Farr is also supporting a new campaign by CAL to build public understanding of indoor air quality (IAQ), initially in London, with advice for people on protecting themselves (adaptation) and reducing pollution for themselves and others (mitigation).

IAQ can be worse than outdoor (i.e. ambient) air quality (AAQ). Without filters, up to 50% (and much more in some cases) of air pollution found indoors comes from outside. IAQ can be further affected by: tobacco smoke from indoor smoking; combustion (such as gas cooking or candles); water systems, leaks and condensation; and substances emitted from some building materials, furnishings and cleaning agents Note 1. According to the Mayor of London, domestic gas combustion (e.g. from cooking and heating) in turn contributed 22% to ambient air emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in Greater London in 2008 Note 2. IAQ can be improved by particle filters and/or molecular filters which largely eliminate harmful particles and gases respectively. Today’s European citizens spend – on average – over 90% of their time indoors Note 1.

Camfil Farr and CAL agree that clean air is a human right. The sponsorship is based on mutual respect and is backed by an explicit agreement that CAL can speak without ‘fear or favour’. Camfil Farr has made clear to CAL its commitment to the banning of smoking in buildings.

As part of this sponsorship CAL will provide a minimum number of days of advisory services to Camfil Farr each year. The sponsorship will be disclosed on CAL’s website and further brought to the attention of relevant parties if either CAL or Camfil Farr considers a conflict of interest might be perceived.

Further announcements are expected in coming months.

Quotes:

Bill Wilkinson, Managing Director of Camfil Farr in the UK, said:

“Camfil Farr believes that Clean Air is a human right and so we design high quality filtration solutions that meet the needs of sustainable ventilation by creating the right balance between healthy indoor air and energy savings. We welcome the opportunity to work with Clean Air in London to highlight the issues surrounding indoor air quality, air pollution and its effect on human health.”

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“It has been marvellous to get to know Camfil Farr with its passion for clean air. With Camfil Farr’s support, CAL is able to launch a much needed and exciting new campaign to warn people of the dangers of poor indoor air quality and press for further legal standards to protect people in public buildings. As Clean Air in London’s first sponsor, Camfil Farr’s financial support will also aid the sustainability of Clean Air in London.”


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 21 June 2011

Long-term exposure to air pollution may have contributed to all 15,800 deaths due to cardiovascular causes in London in 2009 (i.e. one in three of all deaths) at an average additional loss of life for each of these adults of some three years at typical ages (e.g. 15% below age 65)

New scientific research indicates that children exposed to higher levels of traffic-related air pollution at school and home are at increased risk of developing asthma

Scientists say living near roads travelled by 10,000 or more vehicles per day could be responsible for some 15-30 per cent of all new cases of asthma in children; and of COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and CHD (coronary heart disease) in adults 65 years of age and older

Clean Air in London has found 1,148 schools in London within 150 metres of roads carrying 10,000 or more vehicles per day and a total of 2,270 schools within 400 metres of such roads

Note: This Campaign Update is based largely on Clean Air in London’s submission dated 30 May 2011 to Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee inquiry ‘Air Quality: a follow up report’

Groundbreaking research highlights health impacts of air pollution

Two groundbreaking recent scientific reports have highlighted the health impacts of air pollution on young people and the elderly. The first report was published by European scientists as part of the Aphekom project on 2 March and the second was published by the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) on 21 December last year. See:

http://comeap.org.uk/component/content/article/28-page-linking/128-the-mortality-effects-of-long-term-exposure-to-particulate-air-pollution-in-the-uk.html

http://www.aphekom.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=5532fafa-921f-4ab1-9ed9-c0148f7da36a&groupId=10347

Clean Air in London has highlighted its concerns for the health of Londoners, arising particularly from these reports, in its submission dated 30 May to Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee and at the cross-party ‘Air Pollution and Health’ seminar organised by Darren Johnson AM (Green) on 20 June.

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London (CAL), said:

“The Mayor of London told us last June that, using the language used for alcoholism, obesity and smoking, an estimated 4,267 deaths in London in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles (PM2.5).

“Groundbreaking recent research by COMEAP on how to express the mortality effects of air pollution has shown us that the average loss of life for these 4,267 people was about 11.5 years. We know too the Mayor’s estimate will have been calculated after eliminating the effect of dozens of other possible risk factors (e.g. educational status as a surrogate for income and smoking) to produce a pure number assuming air pollution is the sole cause of those deaths.

“The estimate of 4,267 extra or excess deaths is a good one for comparing the effects of air pollution with the effects of other causes such as alcohol, active or passive smoking, obesity, diet etc which are calculated in the same way. However, COMEAP has shown us that because, in practice, individuals experience multiple risks, including air pollution, almost certainly air pollution played some part in shortening the life of a much larger number of individuals in London. It is not possible to estimate that number reliably but given that much of the impact of air pollution on mortality is linked to cardiovascular deaths, it is more reasonable to consider that air pollution may have contributed to all 15,800 deaths due to cardiovascular causes in London [in 2009] (i.e. one in three of all deaths) at an average additional loss of life for these people of some three years (at typical ages for cardiovascular deaths e.g. 15% of which are before age 65).

“Separate scientific research published recently by the Aphekom group of scientists has shown that those living near roads travelled by 10,000 or more vehicles per day on average could be responsible for some 15-30 per cent of all new cases of asthma in children; and of COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and CHD (coronary heart disease) in adults 65 years of age and older. The same study further estimated that, on average for all 10 cities studied, 15-30 per cent of exacerbations of asthma in children, acute worsening of COPD and acute CHD problems are attributable to air pollution. This burden is substantially larger than previous estimates of exacerbations of chronic diseases, since it has been ignored so far that air pollution may cause the underlying disease as well. Related research indicates that associations of asthma with traffic-related pollution from nearby sources at schools were independent of estimated effects of exposures at homes.

“Clean Air in London (CAL) has looked at the implications for London of this groundbreaking recent research into the effects of air pollution on public health. For the first time, research is telling us that traffic-related air pollution can cause asthma in young people and may have contributed to all 15,800 deaths due to cardiovascular causes in London [in 2009] (e.g. heart attacks and strokes but one in three of all deaths) at an average additional loss of life for these adults of some three years. After a Freedom of Information request to Transport for London, CAL has found 1,148 schools in London within 150 metres of roads carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day and a total of 2,270 within 400 metres of such roads.

“The Government and Mayor Johnson must tackle an invisible public health crisis harming as many people now as we thought during the Great Smog in December 1952. We need: one or more additional inner low emission zones that ban the oldest diesel vehicles from our most polluted roads; and a massive campaign to build public understanding of the dangers of air pollution with advice on how people can protect themselves (i.e. adaptation) and reduce air pollution for themselves and others (i.e. mitigation).

“In this context, it is ridiculous of the Government to be saying it can’t comply with air quality laws in London until 2025. Even the ‘backward stepping’ Mayor has said it could be done by January 2015.”


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 21 April 2011


‘Bad Air Day (B.A.D.) 2011 for particles’ as PM10 daily limit value for a whole year is breached in London in less than four months – more than two months earlier than last year

Government issues national 'High pollution episode warning: First "summer-smog" of 2011'

UK has now breached for 2011 the legal standard for PM10; it provides further evidence UK mislead European Commission in its time extension applications; it jeopardises UK’s time extension for PM10 which is still subject to a temporary and conditional exemption; and it makes likely a reference to European Court of Justice and fines of £300m per annum in due course

Backward steps by Mayor Johnson, such as the delay by 15 months of Mayor Livingstone’s Phase 3 of the low emission zone, have aggravated London’s air pollution problems

London needs an inner low emission zone for the 2012 Olympic Games that will ban the driving of pre-Euro 4 diesel vehicles within the area bounded by the north and south circular roads

The excellent London Air Quality Network has reported today that concentrations of dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London, as measured at its Marylebone Road FDMS (i.e. Filter Dynamics Measurement System) monitor, exceeded a 24 hour mean of 50 micrograms per cubic metre (ug/m3) for the 36th time on 20 April 2011. See:

http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/advstatsaqobjresults.asp?site1=MY7&site2=&site3=&site4=&sday=1&smonth=jan&syear=2011&Submit=View

This means the PM10 daily limit value for a whole year has been breached in London in less than four months. This is more than two months earlier than last year.

The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs issued today a national ‘High pollution episode warning: First “summer-smog” of 2011’. The alert includes links to reports about the health impact of summer smog episodes in August 2003 and June/July 2006. See:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2011/04/21/summer-smog/

Quotes:

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“It is shocking that the legal standard, which is itself twice the World Health Organisation (WHO) guideline for human exposure, has been breached for the whole of 2011 before the end of April. This is more than two months earlier than last year.

“Mayor Johnson’s backward steps have aggravated London’s air pollution problems. These have included deferring Phase 3 of the low emission zone from 4 October 2010 to 3 January 2012 and rejecting advice from his own consultants on the actions needed to tackle PM10 exceedances at hotspots.

“The Mayor has backed himself into a corner where the only way to avoid £300m fines per year is likely to be a prolonged odd and even number plate ban. Such a ban is looking inevitable also to keep London moving during the Olympics as the Mayor continues to refuse to introduce an inner low emission zone.

“The Mayor should be giving Londoners advice about protecting themselves (adaptation) and reducing air pollution for themselves and others (mitigation). People should be walking down side streets not busy roads and walking or cycling or using public transport rather than driving particularly older diesel vehicles. Who has warned people that bonfires over Easter will make air pollution worse still in London?

“We need Mayor Johnson and the Government to tackle an invisible public health crisis with as many premature deaths attributable to air pollution in London in 2008 as we thought occurred during the Great Smog of 1952.

“Last but not least, let’s remember than the hourly limit value for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) was breached for the year in early January and annual concentrations for NO2 exceed twice the guideline level set by the WHO as with PM10.”

Analysis

World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines are designed to offer guidance in reducing the health impact of air pollution. The latest World Health Organisation guideline (2008) for PM10 is that an annual mean of 20 ug/m3 and a daily mean of 50 ug/m3 should not be exceeded [i.e. at all]. The WHO says that “as research has not identified a level below which adverse effects do not occur, it must be stressed that the guideline values provided here cannot protect fully human health”. See:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/943153q7637737t0/fulltext.pdf

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2006/WHO_SDE_PHE_OEH_06.02_eng.pdf

PM10 limit values were put in legislation in 1999 and have been required to be met since 1 January 2005. Under European Union (EU) and UK air quality laws, daily mean concentrations of PM10 in ambient air may not exceed 50 ug/m3 on more than 35 days in a calendar year and annual mean concentrations may not exceed 40 ug/m3.

The EU directive on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe 2008/50/EC (Air Quality Directive) gave Member States the opportunity to apply for a time extension until 11 June 2011 to comply with these limit values. The UK’s first application was rejected by the European Commission (Commission) in December 2009 and the second was granted a ‘temporary and conditional exemption’ on 11 March 2011. The main condition is that the UK must amend the London air quality plan by 11 June 2011 and submit it to the European Commission by 30 November 2011. Until the UK satisfies fully the terms of the exemption it does not have a time extension. If the UK obtains a time extension, the European Commission would close infraction proceedings against the UK for historic breaches of PM10 limit values.

The breach is very significant, inter alia, since:

i. The UK has now breached for 2011 EU and UK air quality laws for PM10

With no time extension obtained yet by the UK for PM10, this represents the seventh successive year of such breaches of health based air quality laws since they entered into force on 1 January 2005.

ii. It is further evidence the UK mislead the European Commission over its time extension reapplication

Article 22 of the Air Quality Directive requires that Member States applying for a time extension ‘shall demonstrate how conformity will be achieved with the limit values before the new deadline’.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:152:0001:0044:EN:PDF

In its reapplication, the UK predicted 43 exceedances of the PM10 daily limit value at Marylebone Road in 2011 or 32 after deducting ‘sea salt’. See page 12 of its submission to the European Commission:

http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/ambient/library?l=/application_extensions/uk/official_notifications/re-notification/official_notification/_EN_1.0_&a=d

This seemed an overly optimistic projection at the time and has now been shown to be so.

iii. It jeopardises the UK’s time extension to avoid infraction action for PM10 historic breaches

The Commission granted a temporary and conditional exemption in the Greater London Urban Area from the EU’s air quality standards for PM10.

In doing so the Commission considered there may be a risk of the PM10 daily limit value being exceeded after the exemption period ending on 11 June 2011. The time extension reapplication to comply with the PM10 daily limit value in London was therefore granted on the condition that short-term measures are introduced to control, or, where necessary, suspend activities which contribute to the risk of the limit values being exceeded.

The Commission’s media release and formal decision can be seen at:

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/285&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

See paragraph 21 on page 5 which sets out the conditions required to obtain a time extension.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/quality/legislation/pdf/uk2_en.pdf

It is clear now that short-term measures to control exceedances of the PM10 daily limit value, such as dust suppressants, are not working effectively in London. This is not surprising given that the Mayor of London has rejected the recommendations of his own consultants to introduce more meaningful measures.

It seems likely the Commission will judge the condition not met unless the UK stops further exceedances of the PM10 daily limit value.

iv. European Commission is likely to refer the UK quickly to the European Court of Justice

When granting the ‘temporary and conditional exemption’ the Commission froze rather than closed infraction action against the UK for breaches of the PM10 daily limit value since January 2005. This means the Commission does not need to send the UK first and second/final written warnings again before referring the UK to the ECJ. The Commission is in an ideal position therefore to refer the UK to the ECJ and seek a judgement against it. If the UK did not comply with such a judgment, the Commission could send the UK further first and second/final written warnings after which it could ask the ECJ to impose unlimited lump sum and daily fines on the UK. These have been estimated by the Mayor at £300m per year per pollutant.

v. UK is set to breach the new deadline even if it obtains a time extension for PM10 to 2011

Under Commission guidance on its interpretation of the Air Quality Directive, the UK must ensure the PM10 legal standards are achieved in 2011. Further details can be seen at:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0403:FIN:EN:PDF

vi. It brings closer the prospect of fines being passed to Londoners under a Localism Act

One of the first acts of the Government once the Localism Bill receives Royal Assent may be to write to Mayor Johnson putting him on formal notice that London will be responsible for any fines arising over breaches of the PM10 limit values in London.

vii. It makes more essential the need to avoid a repetition in 2012 before the Olympics

Any breaches of the PM10 limit value after 2011 would be unlawful. Worse, assuming there is an ECJ judgement against the UK for historic non-compliance with these standards, the UK could found in contempt of Court and therefore face the imminent prospect of unlimited lump sum and daily fines.

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 11 March 2011

Mayor Johnson stumbles and falls after backward steps on air quality. 'Wake-up call’ to Mayor and so-called ‘greenest Government’ in run-up to London 2012 Olympics

Clean Air in London (CAL) hails European Commission’s temporary and conditional exemption as an ideal mechanism to maximise pressure on UK to comply with health based laws. It requires urgent air quality action in London and ‘freezes’ the current enforcement process

CAL calls on Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee to investigate whether UK is acting in good faith on air quality laws including: the monitoring of air pollution; reporting to the Commission; and keeping secret ministerial briefings relating to legal action

CAL thanks Commissioner Potočnik and his team; Jean Lambert MEP and Darren Johnson AM (Green); Ken Livingstone, Claude Moraes MEP and Murad Qureshi AM (Labour); and Sarah Ludford MEP and Mike Tuffrey AM (Liberal Democrat) for their contributions to this outcome

The European Commission (Commission) has granted a temporary and conditional exemption in the Greater London Urban Area from the European Union’s air quality standards for dangerous airborne particles known as PM10.

The Commission considers there may be a risk of the PM10 daily limit value being exceeded after the exemption period ending on 11 June 2011. The time extension reapplication to comply with the PM10 daily limit value in London has therefore been granted on the condition that short-term measures are introduced to control, or, where necessary, suspend activities which contribute to the risk of the limit values being exceeded. In other words: no new short-term air quality measures; no time extension.

The Commission’s media release and formal decision can be seen at:

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/285&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/quality/legislation/time_extensions.htm

With the Mayor having postponed systematic long-term measures, such as Phase 3 of the London low emission zone (which could have provided a margin of safety to avoid the need for short-term measures), this new plan could include measures in relation to traffic (e.g. local bans for the dirtiest vehicles when pollution is worst), construction work, ships at berth and the use of industrial plants or products and domestic heating. The UK should ensure that those measures or, if appropriate, a short-term action plan within the meaning of Article 24 of Directive 2008/50/EC (Air Quality Directive) are in place by 11 June 2011 at the latest and shall communicate them to the Commission by 30 November 2011.

Further, by ‘freezing’ not cancelling, the current infringement process for breaches of the PM10 limit values in London since 2005 (which has already passed the final written warning stage), the Commission remains able to refer the UK to the European Court of Justice if the conditions of the exemption are not met. A reference to the European Court of Justice could therefore take place in the months leading up to the London 2012 Olympics.

In any event, the UK must comply fully with the PM10 annual mean and daily limit values throughout London (and the rest of the UK) in 2011 and thereafter. It must do so irrespective of weather conditions, transboundary air pollution, street geometry or other factors that have been used as excuses in the past.

The Commission’s decision is very significant because:

i. it removes any remaining uncertainty

The Air Quality Directive gave Member States the chance to apply for a time extension until 2011 to comply with the PM10 limit values. This has meant no-one has been sure from when the limit values would apply. That uncertainty is removed by today’s announcement as no further time extension applications are allowed.

ii. action must be taken this year to protect public health

The Commission’s requirement for immediate action by the Mayor and the Government means that public health will be protected to the maximum extent enforceable by law.

iii. legal pressure on the Mayor and the Government is intense and increased

The Commission has found a way to require action by the Government and the Mayor now rather than grab a headline (e.g. by rejecting unconditionally the time extension reapplication for PM10) but lose months or years while an enforcement case works its way to the European Court of Justice.

The Commission remains able to refer the UK to the European Court of Justice if the conditions of the exemption are not met (i.e. move from Stage 2 to Stage 3 of enforcement process (with fines occurring at Stage 6)). In contrast, if an unconditional time extension had been granted, some four years of legal pressure would have been lost (since the original first written warning was in January 2009 and the next would be in October 2012 or later i.e. shortly after ratified data for 2011 is reported).

Separately and together, this means there is no let-up in the pressure on the UK to comply with the PM10 limit values in London.

iv. any future breaches of PM10 limit values will be unlawful

Any breach of the PM10 annual mean or daily limit values in London (or elsewhere in the UK) in 2011 or thereafter will be unlawful. This should make it easier for the Commission to progress quickly through the six stage enforcement process and seek unlimited lump sum and daily fines for persistent offending. These fines might total £300 million per year per pollutant.

v. it sets a strong precedent for robust action to enforce nitrogen dioxide laws

The Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy (AQS) says that road transport is the dominant source of PM10 emissions in central London, contributing around 79% in 2008, 80% in 2011 and 75% in 2015 (paragraph 2.5.3 on page 38). The AQS estimates that road transport is the main source of PM2.5 emissions in London, contributing around 80% in 2008, with a slightly lower proportion in 2015 (see paragraph 2.5.6 on page 41).

A health study published by the Mayor estimated that some 4,267 premature deaths in London in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5 (with each such person dying up to 11 ½ years early). This was nearly one in 12 of all deaths recorded in London in that year.

Quotes:

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“The Mayor has stumbled and fallen after backward steps on air quality measures. This is a ‘wake-up call’ to the Mayor and the so-called ‘greenest Government’ in the run-up to the London 2012 Olympics.

“Clean Air in London (CAL) hails the European Commission’s (Commission’s) temporary and conditional exemption as an ideal mechanism to maximise pressure on the UK to comply with health based laws. It requires urgent air quality action in London and cleverly ‘freezes’ the current enforcement process for several months. Even now fines are not inevitable if the Mayor and the Government take urgent action to improve London’s air quality. It is a scandal that they have ignored for years common sense, their duties and the calls of Londoners for them to take action.

“The UK has not deserved a time extension to comply with the daily limit value for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London. It failed to comply with the pre-conditions or show convincingly how the legal standard will be achieved throughout London in 2011 – for example at Horn Lane in Ealing. It is clear the Commission was not satisfied with the UK’s reapplication for a time extension.

“There is plenty of evidence to suggest the UK has submitted selective or misleading responses to the Commission as part of its applications for a time extension. For example, it seems to have:

i. argued that transboundary air pollution was the cause of breaches of the PM10 limit values but failed to comply with Commission guidance;
ii. argued that Marylebone Road is a street canyon when it did not meet the Commission’s guidance on street geometry;
iii. denied the PM10 annual mean limit was breached in London in 2009 despite the Mayor saying, in his final Air Quality Strategy (AQS), that it had been;
iv. included, illogically, the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) in its reapplication for a time extension but excluded Phase 3 of the low emission zone. It then had to apologise to the Commission in writing in January this year for confusing it over the WEZ;
v. asserted that the PM10 daily limit value will be achieved throughout London in 2011 after an annual deduction for ‘sea salt’ whereas Commission guidance says this approach is ‘unreliable’;
vi. told the Commission that the highest monitored and modelled levels of PM10 occur in Marylebone Road and sought to ignore the worse sites shown on the London Air Quality Network (e.g. Horn Lane) – despite Horn Lane and other sites meeting the micro-siting and data quality requirements of the Air Quality Directive;
vii. included the draft AQS formally in its first application and sought to include the final version of the AQS ‘informally’ in its second application; and
viii. ignored the trend so far this year, even at the Government’s preferred monitoring station in Marylebone Road, which has shown 15 exceedances of the PM10 daily limit value (out of 35 allowed for a whole year) compared to just nine by the same time last year.

“The UK looks set to try to hide the facts further as part of its five yearly review of monitoring stations this year. The UK also continues to keep secret information requested by CAL over two years ago under the Freedom of Information Act. CAL is therefore calling on Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee to investigate whether the UK is acting in good faith on air quality laws including: the monitoring of air pollution; reporting to the Commission; and keeping secret ministerial briefings relating to legal action.

“This decision reminds us of the scandal of Mayor Johnson’s backwards steps on air quality and inaction by the so-called ‘greenest Government’. CAL urges a simultaneous twin track approach to address this public health crisis: rapidly escalating legal action if either of the PM10 limit values is breached in London in 2011 (as already looks likely); and radical action by the Mayor and Government. CAL will be looking closely to see whether the UK complies with the strict conditions of the exemption.

“CAL thanks Commissioner Potočnik and his colleagues for the great care they have taken in reaching this decision and recognises that the Commission will have felt obliged to accept the UK’s representations at face value. CAL also wishes to thank its supporters for the valuable part they have played in today’s successful outcome. I would like to thank particularly: Darren Johnson AM and Jean Lambert MEP (Green); Lord Berkeley, Ken Livingstone, Claude Moraes MEP and Murad Qureshi AM; Sarah Ludford MEP and Mike Tuffrey AM (Liberal Democrat); and the Campaign for Better Transport, ClientEarth, Environmental Protection UK, Friends of the Earth and the London Forum of Amenity and Civic Societies.

“Separately, we should not forget that the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) annual mean and hourly limit values, which entered into force on 1 January 2010, were breached by a factor of two near London’s busiest streets last year. The hourly limit value for the whole of 2011 was breached early in January.

“We now need Mayor Johnson and the Government to play their part in tackling an invisible public health crisis with as many early deaths attributable to air pollution in London in 2008 as we thought occurred during the Great Smog in 1952.”


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 6 March 2011


US research “indicates that children exposed to higher levels of traffic-related air pollution at school and home are at increased risk of developing asthma"

Leading scientists say “living near roads travelled by 10,000 or more vehicles per day could be responsible for some 15-30% of all new cases of asthma in children; and of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and coronary heart disease (CHD) in adults 65 years of age and older”

13 schools within 150 metres of London roads with an annual average daily flow estimate of greater than 100,000 vehicles and 75 in total within 400 metres of such roads


In response to a Freedom of Information request from Clean Air in London (CAL), Transport for London (TfL) has released a list of schools near London roads with an annual average daily flow estimate of greater than 100,000. The list shows 13 schools within 150 metres of such roads and a total of 75 within 400 metres.

CAL is publishing this information just days after leading European scientists, working for the last three years on the Aphekom project, concluded that “living near roads travelled by 10,000 or more vehicles per day could be responsible for 15-30% of all new asthma cases in children; and of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and coronary heart disease (CHD) in adults 65 years of age and older”.

US research published by Rod McConnell et al in July 2010 “indicates that children exposed to higher levels of traffic-related air pollution at school and home are at increased risk of developing asthma”. That research went on to say “Planning transportation and other urban development to limit population exposure to traffic exhaust, as well as more effective control of vehicular emissions, may result in substantial long-term public health benefits”.

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“This new information from different sources highlights the need to reduce harmful emissions from road transport and warn people how to protect themselves from its effects (i.e. so called mitigation and adaptation).

“It comes as Planning Inspectors are due to report imminently on the Mayor’s draft London Plan and the European Commission is due to decide on the UK’s reapplication for a time extension until 2011 to comply with the daily legal standard for dangerous airborne particles in London.

“It is a scandal the Mayor and the Government are doing so little to protect the most vulnerable in our society from the dangers of traffic-related air pollution.”

In response to the Aphekom findings, CAL has submitted a further information request to TfL asking for a list of schools near London roads carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day on average.


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 2 March 2011

Founder of Clean Air in London seeks to fight Government at Court of Appeal over London air quality information

Friends of the Earth's Rights and Justice team has lodged an application on behalf of Simon Birkett (Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London) for permission to appeal a recent judgment of the Upper Tribunal to the Court of Appeal. The judgment related to a request more than two years ago for information about air quality in London.

The Upper Tribunal concluded that a public authority, which has initially relied on a particular exception under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR 2004), has a right to rely on additional or different exceptions at a later stage without permission of the Information Commissioner or the First-tier Tribunal (subject only to the First-tier Tribunal's case management powers).

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“It is of paramount public interest that Defra discloses this information.

“We considered taking the fight straight back to the First-tier Tribunal but have decided instead to seek permission to appeal to a higher Court - subject to getting cost protection - because this case now also raises fundamental points on access to environmental justice. This case has implications for every person who requests environmental information in future as well as raising questions about the integrity of the so-called ‘greenest Government’. I hope the Information Commissioner would participate fully in any appeal as a respondent.

“The information sought very likely relates to an imminent decision by the European Commission as to whether or not to escalate legal action against the UK for breaching health based air quality laws for dangerous airborne particles in London.

“A pattern is emerging of Government opaqueness and/or obscuration when it comes to compliance with health based air quality laws. I urge the Government instead to commit to transparency and release the information sought.”

Simon Birkett is advised in this case by Friends of the Earth's Rights and Justice team and barristers Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John of Monckton Chambers.

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 14 February 2011

Government obtains the right to add or substitute exceptions to avoid disclosing information

Information may relate to European Commission’s imminent infraction decision on PM10

The Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) has made a landmark decision on an access to information appeal involving the Home Office and the Information Commissioner’s Office. The decision gives the Government the right to add or substitute exceptions to avoid disclosing information requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This case was heard at the same time as a Defra appeal which involves the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CAL) and the Information Commissioner’s Office.

The Upper Tribunal ruled then in the Defra appeal that public authorities have the same right under the Environmental Information Regulations as it has found them to have under the FOIA. See:

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=3160

The effect of the latest decision is to make it easier for Defra to try to keep secret information requested by Simon Birkett, on behalf of CAL, in January 2009. This is because Defra is belatedly seeking to rely on ‘legal advice privilege’ and ‘litigation privilege’ to withhold the information. Given the information requested relates to air quality in London it is highly likely that Defra is hiding information which relates in some way to the European Commission’s imminent decision on infraction action and a time extension to comply with the daily limit value for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London. The public interest in favour of disclosure is therefore overwhelming.

CAL is consulting its legal advisers, Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice team and barristers Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John, before deciding whether to lodge an application to appeal the Upper Tribunal’s decision to the Court of Appeal or try to obtain the information more quickly at the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights).

The European Commission’s imminent decision on the PM10 time extension request may be a relevant factor in CAL’s decision which must be made by the end of February.

Note:

Defra appealed to the Upper Tribunal after:

i. missing unlawfully the deadline to respond to Simon Birkett’s request, on behalf of CAL, for information in January 2009;
ii. appealing against the decision by the Information Commissioner’s Office that all the information requested should be released to CAL; and
iii. appealing against a decision by the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) that the late use of exceptions would not be allowed in the case.

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 19 January 2011

Clean Air in London exacts promise from Mayor to deliver compensatory measures which will ensure cleaner air for west London despite the removal of the WEZ

Mayor Johnson has created a ‘substantive legitimate expectation’ that offsetting measures will be introduced to ensure not only that there is no worsening of air quality within the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) but that air quality is actually improved relative to 2010

Government threatens to remove its only monitoring station in the WEZ area from its network

‘Bad Air Day (B.A.D.) 2011 for toxic gas’ as the NO2 hourly limit value is first breached in London for the whole of 2011 within a few days in Brompton Road and Putney High Street

Quotes from Clean Air in London and Environmental Protection UK

Clean Air in London (CAL) sent the Mayor of London a Letter before Action on 3 December 2010 about a proposed claim for Judicial Review of the Mayor’s decision on 3 October 2010 to remove the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ).

In that letter, the Mayor was requested to agree to ensure that annual mean and peak concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and other Air Quality Directive pollutants in ambient air throughout the WEZ area will not exceed those in 2010 following the removal of the WEZ.

In response, the Mayor and Transport for London (TfL) – acting for the Mayor – have provided new assurances to CAL that offsetting measures will be introduced to ensure not only that there is no worsening of air quality within the WEZ, but that air quality is actually improved relative to 2010. These assurances are surprising because the Mayor and TfL have both previously said removing the WEZ would increase air pollution in west London and they have never quantified the cumulative impact of mitigation measures (Notes 1 and 2).

On the above basis, CAL has instructed Harrison Grant Solicitors to accept the assurances and decided not to proceed with a judicial challenge to the Mayor’s decision to remove the WEZ.

In summary, the new assurances include:

• “The air quality impacts of the removal of WEZ are more than offset by the additional measures set out in the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy…including within the WEZ”. TfL letter dated 17 December

• “In the unlikely event of a discernible worsening of air quality in the WEZ area, we would implement targeted local measures, in the same way as in other localised parts of central London if such problems were to arise.” Boris Johnson answer to Mike Tuffrey AM on 15 December

• “Concentrations of [nitrogen dioxide] NO2 and [dangerous airborne particles] PM10 are not expected to exceed those in 2010 following the removal of WEZ.” TfL letter dated 17 December

See also Note 1 for further details of the assurances received.

The Mayor’s public commitment to reduce emissions in the WEZ area, and the statements in TfL’s letter to CAL’s solicitors, give rise to a ‘substantive legitimate expectation’ that offsetting measures will be introduced to ensure not only that is there no worsening of air quality within the WEZ area, but that air quality is actually improved relative to 2010 (see Note 3).

Note: The Harrison Grant letters dated 3 December 2010 and 14 January 2011 are available from CAL’s website. CAL has no objection to TfL publishing its letter to CAL dated 17 December 2010.

Quotes:

James Grugeon, Chief Executive of Environmental Protection UK, said:

“We are pleased the Mayor has provided assurances that air quality in the Western Extension area will be ‘no worse’ than 2010 levels and indeed improve. Clean Air in London is to be congratulated for extracting this commitment from him. We must remember though, the Mayor is replacing a tried and tested means of reducing air pollution in inner London (i.e. the Western Extension) with novel and untested measures in his Air Quality Strategy. We will therefore be keeping a close eye on air quality monitoring in the former Western Extension area to ensure that the Mayor’s assertions are correct. Let's not forget, this is about protecting public health.”

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“Clean Air in London (CAL) welcomes the promise from the Mayor of London that he will deliver compensatory measures which will ensure cleaner air for west London despite the removal of the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ). It is very disappointing though to have had to fight for more than two and a half years to win a commitment to measures to offset backward steps on air quality.

“The Mayor’s public commitment to reduce emissions in the WEZ area, and the statements in Transport for London’s letter to CAL’s solicitors, give rise to a ‘substantive legitimate expectation’ that offsetting measures will be introduced to ensure not only that there is no worsening of air quality within the WEZ area, but that air quality is actually improved relative to 2010.

“This case has shown that the Mayor cannot pursue seemingly populist policies unless he: complies fully with his statutory responsibilities including those to protect public health; and ensures that gains in one part of London are not achieved at the expense of another. To run a great city likes ours, the Mayor must be able to ‘walk and chew gum at the same time’.

“CAL will be closely monitoring the relevant air pollutants at the three automatic monitoring stations within the WEZ area on the excellent London Air Quality Network i.e. Brompton Road, Cromwell Road and King’s Road (see Note 4). CAL expects that action will be taken swiftly should the proposed measures fail to achieve the promised ‘more than offsetting’ effect on air pollution in the WEZ area and beyond.

“In that context it was surprising to see ‘Bad Air Day (B.A.D.) 2011 for toxic gas’ as the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) hourly limit value was first breached in London for the whole of 2011 within a week in Brompton Road (and Putney High Street). The breach in Brompton Road, in even less time than last year, suggests – at this earliest of stages – the Mayor may have some thinking to do to deliver on his assurances (see Note 5).

“In a separate but related development, it is disturbing the Government is threatening to remove its only monitoring station in the WEZ area, situated in Cromwell Road, from its national network during 2011.

Note: Details of the Government’s intentions were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and are available on the CAL website.


Tweet



   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 12 January 2011

Friends of the Earth/Clean Air in London press release

Government attempts to keep London air pollution information secret

A freedom of information tribunal is being urged by environmental campaigners to reject Government attempts to keep secret sections of ministerial briefing papers on air pollution in London. The Government’s appeal against a previous ruling to make the information public will be heard today and tomorrow (12 and 13 January 2011).

The information could have major implications for Government efforts to prevent the European Union prosecuting the UK for persistently breaching air quality laws. It has been requested by Simon Birkett, who is Founder and Director of Clean Air in London and represented by lawyers from Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice Centre and barristers Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John of Monckton Chambers. A separate decision from the EU on its legal action is expected imminently.

In January 2009 Clean Air in London filed a freedom of information request asking for “a copy of any minutes, papers, correspondence or other material relating directly to any meeting (including sent subsequent to it) that takes places between Lord Hunt [Environment Minister under the previous Labour Government] and Mayor Johnson”. The sections of the documents which the Government has yet to release are believed to relate to the western extension of the congestion charging zone and air quality.

Despite two rulings in favour of Mr Birkett (by the Information Commissioner's Office in November 2009 and at an appeal heard by the First-tier Tribunal in May 2010), the Government has continued to refuse to make the information public.

The Government is appealing for a second time (this time to the Administrative Appeals Chamber of the Upper Tribunal) – arguing that it was entitled to say, for the first time to the First Tier Tribunal, that the information is covered by ‘legal advice privilege and litigation privilege’.

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of the Clean Air in London, said:

“For two years successive Governments have fought to keep information about London's air quality secret – if only they’d put as much effort into meeting pollution laws.

“The Mayor estimates that the early death of some 4,300 Londoners in 2008 was attributable to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles – mainly caused by diesel-powered vehicles. This is a national disgrace.

“The Government must not be allowed to hide this information – the public interest in favour of publication is overwhelming.”

Friends of the Earth's Head of Legal Gita Parihar said:

“The Government’s approach to this case makes a mockery of information laws.

“When the Information Commissioner’s Office ruled that the Government's reason for refusing to make the information public wasn’t valid, it came up with two completely new reasons for keeping these documents secret.

“Ministers must deal with freedom of information fairly and openly rather than trying to move the goalposts to protect themselves.”


Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 21 December 2010

Clean Air in London welcomes first offical estimate that 29,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5

The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) has published a report with new calculations of the effects of air pollution on health in the UK. The press release, report and supporting documents can be seen at:

http://www.comeap.org.uk/documents/reports/128-the-mortality-effects-of-long-term-exposure-to-particulate-air-pollution-in-the-uk.html

Quotes:

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“The Government and COMEAP must be congratulated for publishing this ground-breaking report. For the first time we have an official estimate that 29,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5. COMEAP speculates that air pollution, acting together with other factors, may have made some smaller contribution to the earlier deaths of up to 200,000 people.

“For the first time we can compare easily the health impact of long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles (PM2.5) with the Government’s estimates for the number of premature deaths attributable to alcoholism (15,000 to 20,000 in England; average men 20 years, women 15 years), obesity (9,000 in England; average nine years) and smoking (87,000 in England; average 10 years) and understand the complexities of these metrics.

“Clean Air in London urges the Government to publish a breakdown of these air pollution statistics for every local authority in the country (as requested by 89% of people at a recent conference).

“The scale of the UK’s air pollution problems is enormous when we consider that the estimates published today don’t include the health impact of short-term exposure to particles (8,100 in urban GB) or other air pollutants (such as ozone (between 700 to 12,500 in urban and rural GB) and sulphur dioxide (3,500 in urban GB)) which overlap to an unknown extent with these numbers and each other.

“This new report tells us that population-weighted mean concentrations of anthropogenic (i.e. man made) PM2.5 in Inner London and Outer London were 49.7% and 36.1% respectively higher than the national average in 2008.

“We are reminded yet again of the human cost of the Mayor’s backward steps on air quality measures.”

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 14 December 2010

Mayor Johnson takes more backward steps and gambles with health-based air quality laws

Mayor makes last ditch effort to support the reapplication by the self-styled ‘greenest Government ever’ for a time extension until 2011 to comply with legal standards for dangerous airborne particles (PM10)

‘Clean Air in London’ urges the European Commission to reject the UK’s reapplication for a time extension for PM10 and escalate legal action. A decision is expected ‘within days or weeks’

Still no commitment to ensure air pollution is not worsened if western extension of congestion charge is removed

The Mayor of London has published his final Air Quality Strategy (AQS). See announcement and supporting documents:

http://www.london.gov.uk/media/press_releases_mayoral/mayors-tough-new-air-quality-standards-remove-dirtiest-black-cabs-londo

http://www.london.gov.uk/air-quality

Mayor takes more backward steps and gambles with health-based air quality laws

Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, said:

“After two and a half years, Mayor Johnson’s final Air Quality Strategy (MAQS) is still not ‘fit for purpose’. The Mayor has stumbled again after still more backward steps since his draft AQS.

“Amazingly, the Mayor has dropped his own proposal to introduce a 10 year age limit for new licenced taxis (black cabs) from 2015. This might explain why the Mayor now expects to reduce emissions of dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in central London by 31% between 2008 and 2015 instead of the 33% previously planned.

“The Mayor’s strategy is very disappointing after he told us, many months ago, that some 4,267 premature deaths in London in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles (PM2.5). Shockingly, that number represented about one in 12 deaths in London with each person dying up to nine years early (or maybe 9.8 years on average; see Note 1). The Mayor also told us in March that the economic cost of the health impacts of poor air quality could be as high as £2 billion.

“For the two most important air pollutants for public health, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and dangerous airborne particles (PM10), the MAQS shows:

• PM10 – the Mayor’s confirmed measures to avoid breaches of the PM10 daily limit value in 2011 (and £300m per year fines) boil down to one recently started, small scale trial of dust suppressants over six months at two locations, which aren’t even those most likely to breach the law.

“This is playing ‘Russian Roulette’ on a city scale and will do nothing to improve the life expectancy of Londoners.”

• NO2 – by the Mayor’s own admission, ‘annual mean concentrations of NO2 will exceed the limit value in 2015 at 45% to 65% of roadside locations, unless further action at both London and national level is taken to reduce emissions’ (page 73) and ‘At some locations, however, including kerbsides closest to major roads in central London, limit values will still be exceeded in 2015 to the extent that a further reduction in emissions of 40% to 60% will be needed to meet them’ (page 151).

“The Mayor is trying to ‘wish away’ his duty to comply now with health-based laws for NO2. His strategy will do nothing to stop London breaching again the NO2 hourly limit value before the end January 2011 and the NO2 annual limit value. The Mayor’s response to this problem: give the Government a ‘wish list’ of 14 measures to fund and implement by 2015.

“The complacency of the Mayor on air pollution is being quickly matched by the ‘greenest Government ever’ with both of them thinking they can choose when to comply with health-based air quality laws. This is clearly ridiculous and unacceptable. We need action now to reduce sharply the human cost of air pollution in London and elsewhere.

“The image of our Mayor stumbling after a succession of backward steps on air pollution in London could be reversed in minutes. All it needs is for: the Mayor to admit that the legal standards have been breached in 2010; and the Prime Minister and the Mayor to chair jointly a monthly Clean Air Compliance Taskforce meeting focussed on achieving full compliance with air quality laws.

“Clean Air in London urges the European Commission to reject the UK’s last ditch and desperate effort to delay compliance with legal standards for PM10. Mayor Johnson is ‘setting himself up for a fall’ by predicting full compliance with the PM10 daily limit value throughout London in 2011 when evidence shows the PM10 daily limit value is highly likely to be breached again in 2011.”

Stumbling after backward steps

After disclosing the full impact of air pollution in London in March, the UK received in June a final warning from the European Commission for failing to comply with PM10 laws. Despite this news, the Mayor has gone backwards in the eight months since publishing his draft AQS.

We have watched again the Mayor's backward steps including:

i. LEZ3 – the postponement of Phase 3 of the London low emission zone (LEZ3), which had been intended to protect over 15% of those worst affected to poor air quality, from 4 October 2010 until 3 January 2012 – about three months later even than TfL thought could still be achieved (TfL report, page 18) (20 September);

ii. WEZ – the Mayor saying he will remove the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) from 4 January 2011 – even though it remains a key measure in the Government's reapplication for a time extension until 2011 for PM10 in London (which the European Commission is still considering). Worse, TfL’s own report on the consultation made clear the only argument in favour of removing the WEZ was short-term political gain: “The Mayor will need to weigh the public support for removal [of the WEZ] against the potential adverse impacts” (tfL report, page 67) (20 October);

iii. CCCZ – confirmation that the more-polluting diesel vehicles will get a 100% discount to travel in the central congestion charging zone (CCCZ) while others (e.g. hybrid vehicles with electric capability unless they are ‘plug-in’) will lose theirs (20 October);

iv. bad news on taxis – the draft AQS told us ‘It is proposed that from 2012 no licence will be issued for a taxi over 15 years old. From 2015 it is proposed that this age limit will tighten to 10 years.’ The Mayor has now dropped the 10 year age limit proposed for new licenced taxis from 2015 and weakened his commitment to have zero-emission taxis joining the fleet from 2020; and

v. MAQS – the final Air Quality Strategy is still not ‘fit for purpose’. Unusually, even for the Mayor (compared to his other consultations), the Mayor has gone backwards even from the inadequate draft AQS he published in March.

“Instead of stumbling again after so many backward steps, the Mayor should be leading London in a bold charge to take the benefits of the cleaner, greener world he promised us in his manifesto. The benefits of doing so for public health, green businesses and compliance with wider air pollution and sustainability objectives are immeasurable.”

Clean Air in London urges the European Commission to reject UK’s time extension for PM10

“The European Commission should reject quickly the UK’s reapplication for a time extension to comply with PM10 limit values.

Key reasons include:

1. Marylebone Road is not the most polluted location in London as the Government implies. There are worse sites at Bexley – Erith 49 (exceedances); Brent – Neasden Road (61 exceedances); and Ealing – Horn Lane (91 exceedances). Angie Bray MP (Conservative) is due to lead a debate in Parliament’s Westminster Hall at 11.00am on Wednesday 15 December titled ‘Pollution in Horn Lane, Acton’. See Note 3;

2. the UK did not meet any of the basic pre-conditions for a time extension e.g. taking all measures necessary by 2005; or exceedances being due to transboundary air pollution (which required evidence of discussions to mitigate it) or street canyon effects;

3. the UK’s reapplication for a time extension rightly excluded LEZ3 (which the Mayor has postponed) but wrongly included the WEZ (which the Mayor says he will remove within weeks). The Mayor says this doesn’t matter but his own analysis shows the PM10 daily limit value being breached in 2011 in locations where members of the public have access and concentrations of the most deadly PM10 will increase by up to 3.6% (see Note 4). The Mayor has still provided no evidence and given no firm commitment to mitigate the air pollution that will worsen if the WEZ is removed;

4. the UK’s reapplication fails to ‘demonstrate how conformity will be achieved with the limit values before the new deadline’ as required by Article 22. It is clear this strict requirement won’t be met given the Mayor’s consultation documents on the postponement of LEZ3 admitted ‘no margin of safety etc’ (see Note 5); and

5. the publication of the MAQS makes clear London is still going backwards not forwards. The Mayor has confirmed the backward steps already announced (e.g. LEZ3 and the WEZ) and taken new ones. Even the Mayor says a package of measures is necessary if we are to move ahead and yet all we have seen from him is the announcement of a six month trial of dust suppressants for which the results are promised in Autumn 2011. The most meaningful measures in the MAQS were planned years ago by his predecessor.

“The Mayor has published his Air Quality Strategy days or at most a few weeks before the European Commission is due to rule on the UK’s reapplication for a time extension until 2011 to comply with legal standards for PM10 in London. This looks like a last ditch, desperate attempt to support that application (a year after a previous application was rejected for ‘not even meeting the minimum requirements’).

“The Mayor and the Government will get the ‘wake-up call’, so desperately needed, if the European Commission rejects again the UK’s application for a time extension on PM10. We need to make real the prospect of fines for non-compliance by escalating infraction action immediately if we are ever to persuade our current political leaders to take action.

“Clean Air in London urges the European Commission to reject the UK’s last minute pleas to delay further full compliance with the PM10 limit values in London. With it looking highly likely the PM10 daily limit value will be breached in 2011, for the seventh consecutive year, it would be a travesty if the UK and the Mayor obtain a minimum four year delay in infraction action by saying ‘trust us, it’ll be alright on the night’.”

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 6 December 2010

Clean Air in London considering suing Mayor of London over air pollution consequences of removing the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ)

Clean Air in London issues Letter before Action to Mayor of London to show how seriously it takes the increase in air pollution that would arise if Mayor Johnson removes the WEZ without adequate mitigation

Letter before Action sent also to Caroline Spelman, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs highlighting concerns over Government’s PM10 time extension reapplication

Mayor requested to: (i) ensure air pollution is not worsened; or (ii) delay implementing his Decision until he can ensure air pollution is not worsened; or (iii) reverse his Decision

“This is about defending (and improving) air quality not defending road tax”

Clean Air in London (CAL) has instructed Harrison Grant Solicitors to issue a Letter before Action (LBA) to Mayor Johnson to show how seriously it takes the increase in air pollution that would arise if Mayor Johnson removes the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) without full mitigation. For details of the WEZ and the consultation on its removal see:

TfL media release on 20 October: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/17091.aspx
TfL general information about WEZ: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/17094.aspx
TfL publications on WEZ: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/6722.aspx

The proposed claim for Judicial Review relates to the Mayor’s Decision, announced on 20 October 2010, to remove the WEZ, without putting in place measures to maintain the air quality throughout the WEZ area, in accordance with the obligations of United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU) law.

The LBA was also issued to Caroline Spelman, Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, since Defra is responsible for the UK’s compliance with UK and EU air quality laws. The LBA highlights concerns over the Government’s failure to intervene in relation to the WEZ and its reapplication to the European Commission for a time extension until 2011 to comply with the daily limit value for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) which mistakenly included the WEZ as a planned measure.

Simon Birkett, Founder of Clean Air in London, said:

“Air pollution in London is much worse than most of us have realised. For example, the Mayor has estimated some 4,300 premature deaths in London in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to the smaller PM2.5.

“Clean Air in London has instructed Harrison Grant to issue a ‘Letter before Action’ (LBA) to show how seriously it takes: the increase in air pollution that would arise if Mayor Johnson removes the WEZ without adequate mitigation; and the Government’s mistaken inclusion of the WEZ in its reapplication to the European Commission for a time extension until 2011 to comply with legal standards for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) and avoid £300m fines. Clean Air in London is separately urging the European Commission to reject within weeks the UK’s flawed reapplication for a time extension on PM10.

“To put the issue in context, the Mayor’s own consultation documents estimate that emissions of PM10 would increase by 3-4% on average across the WEZ area if the scheme is removed, compared with an estimate in his draft Air Quality Strategy, of a 13% average reduction between 2008 and 2011 for London as a whole.

"Ambient air concentrations are much harder to reduce than emissions.

“The Mayor has chosen a seemingly populist route despite Transport for London’s (TfL’s) analysis of the traffic, environmental, revenue, economic and social impacts showing overwhelmingly negative results. At least one impact – the need to comply with health-based air quality laws, if necessary through mitigation measures – must not be dismissed. We should expect the Mayor of a large and complex city to ‘walk and chew gum’ at the same time.”

“Clean Air in London hopes that when these matters have been considered further by the Mayor – who says he is keen to seek improvements in the environment and public health – he will act decisively to being down air pollution in the WEZ area.

"Any legal action must always be a last resort. This is about defending (and improving) air quality not defending road tax.”

Proposed Grounds of Challenge

The Proposed Grounds of Challenge would be that the Mayor’s Decision to remove the WEZ without adequate mitigation measures is unlawful amongst other reasons because removal of the WEZ will mean that:

a. the PM10 daily limit value will be breached in 2011 at locations within the WEZ area where members of the public have access;
b. NO2 annual mean and hourly limit values will be breached at locations within the WEZ area where members of the public have access;
c. there will be aggravated breaches of the NO2 hourly limit value whereby it would be exceeded in 2011 at locations having been attained in 2010;
d. there will be aggravated breaches of the requirement to ensure that the limit value for annual mean concentrations of NO2 is not exceeded by more than the maximum margin of tolerance that would apply from 1 January 2010 if the UK obtains a time extension to comply with the NO2 annual limit value as the Mayor is assuming; and
e. air pollution will worsen within the WEZ area.

Action that the Mayor and the Secretary of State are expected to take

The LBA requests the Mayor:

a. to agree to ensure that annual mean and peak concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and other pollutants in ambient air throughout the WEZ area will not exceed those in 2010 following removal of the WEZ;
b. alternatively, to agree to delay implementation of his Decision removing the WEZ until mitigation measures have been put in place to ensure that annual mean and peak concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and other pollutants in ambient air throughout the WEZ area will not exceed those in 2010 following removal of the WEZ;
c. alternatively, to reverse his Decision removing the WEZ.

The Secretary of State is requested to:

a. confirm that if the Mayor fails to act as requested, she will exercise her powers to prevent the Mayor removing the WEZ pending the adoption of alternative measures appropriate for the implementation of UK and EU law; and
b. in any event, to write to the European Commission’s Environment Directorate notifying it: (1) of the planned removal of the WEZ in London; (2) the full consequences of that decision for the UK’s ability to comply with UK and EU air quality laws; and (3) of the impact on the UK’s pending reapplication for a time extension until 2011 to comply with the PM10 daily limit value throughout London (which included the WEZ as a measure being taken).

Mayor Johnson and the Secretary of State are both also asked to consent, under the Aarhus Convention requirements for access to justice in environmental cases, to a protective costs order limiting liability for adverse costs against CAL if the matter were to progress.

Tweet

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 23 November 2010

Government response to Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee Report into Air Quality shows it is in a muddle. Ministers think they can choose when they comply with public health laws

‘Government intends to comply with Community law and to avoid infraction and any fines that could result.’ ‘Coalition agreement includes the commitment to work towards full compliance with EU air quality standards.’ Which is it – comply now or comply never?

Last ditch desperate effort by Government to obtain time extension until 2011 to comply with PM10 limit values. But all it offers is more ‘work in progress’ (again); there’s nothing new or tangible

Will Government delegate authority and resources to the Mayor and local authorities along with responsibility? Or is ‘Big Society’ about cost-cutting at the centre and passing the buck?

The Government has published its response to the House of Commons’ Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) Report on Air Quality in the UK that was published on 22 March 2010. The Government response can be seen at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7966/7966.pdf

Full details of the EAC’s inquiry into Air Quality in the UK can be seen at:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/environmental-audit-committee/inqairquality/

Quotes:

Commenting on the Government response, Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London (CAL), said:

“The Government is in a real muddle over its duty to comply with health-based air quality laws. It says ‘Government intends to comply with Community law and to avoid infraction and any fines that could result’ (para 42) but earlier says the ‘Coalition Agreement includes the commitment to work towards full compliance with EU air quality standards’ (para 3). Which is it – comply now or comply never? Why has the Prime Minister of the ‘greenest government ever’ still not ‘gripped’ this problem?

“This response looks part of a last ditch desperate effort by the Government to persuade the European Commission to allow it a time extension until 2011 to comply with the daily legal standard for dangerous airborne particles (PM10). Surely the Commission won’t be persuaded: yet again we are told there is ‘work in progress’ but there is still nothing new or tangible from the Government.

“Clean Air in London urges the European Commission to waste no time in escalating legal action against the UK for breaching health-based laws for PM10 and NO2 since January 2005 and 2010 respectively.”

Analysis of the Government response

Despite an appalling lack of clarity and results, after more than six months in Government, it seems something may, at last, be happening within
Government. We are told:

1. Public health

• ‘As part of its ongoing work to calculate the overall impact of long-term exposure to PM2.5 on mortality, COMEAP will examine different ways of expressing risks and impacts and will make provisional recommendations by the end of 2010.’ Para 17
• ‘The Government will also shortly be setting out a radical new approach to public health in a white paper focused on protecting the public from health threats such as environmental hazards, improving the healthy life expectancy of the population, and improving the health of the poor fastest. Local Government will be given powers and dedicated resources to make a major impact on people’s health and wellbeing.’ Para 56
• ‘Government will keep under review emerging evidence on the health impacts of coarse particulate from brake, tyre and road wear.’ Para 60

BUT: “When will the Government publish official: local [and national] estimates of premature deaths attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5; and guidance on the careful interpretation of the numbers (as 89% and 93% of people respectively wanted at a recent conference)?”

2. Focus on cost effective compliance with deadlines

• ‘Government departments have developed a new approach specifically for use when there are breaches of environmental limits.’ ‘This will involve using a Marginal Abatement Cost Curve to assess a range of technologies on a cost effectiveness basis.’ ‘This represents the first application of such an approach [by the UK government].’ Paras 24 and 25
• ‘Government is now in the process of procuring further research to investigate a consistent framework for valuation of ecosystems with a view to work being completed in spring 2011.’ Paras 38 and 39

BUT: “What about the lessons of yester-year? Research for Defra’s Air Quality Strategy 2007 showed the benefits of policies in the road transport sector and electricity generating sector have exceeded costs by up to a factor of 24. And guess what: the costs tended to be over-estimated and the benefits underestimated. The more time the Government wastes, the longer it will take to deliver these huge benefits.”

BUT: “Of course money is tight. But it’s going to get a lot tighter if we don’t spend what we have wisely and end up with massive costs for failing to comply with environmental and health limits.”

3. Mayor and local authorities to be given larger roles

• ‘The Mayor of London has responsibility for air quality in London (along with London boroughs) and must prepare an air quality strategy for London.’ Para 10
• ‘In creating a framework of greater freedom for local councils, the need to maintain minimum environmental standards in air quality remains.’ Para 21
• ‘Government will also encourage local authorities to communicate more strongly to local audiences the health impacts of air pollution and the action that individuals can take to reduce it at a local level, for example through transport choices.’ Para 47
• ‘Government agrees that local authorities are key to improving air quality and would like to see them together with local communities to continue to play a strong role on local air quality.’ Para 64
• ‘Government intends to provide the appropriate enabling framework for local management of air quality based on local circumstances.’ Para 72

BUT: “This is another Government muddle. Who’s in charge? The Government implies the Mayor and London boroughs have full responsibility for complying with health-based air quality laws but a letter from Defra to CAL dated 20 July 2010 admits ‘the Secretary of State has overall responsibility for compliance with EU air quality limits’ (attached). Without clear responsibility and matching authority and resources at every level of Government this muddle is going to get worse.”

BUT: “Will the Government delegate authority and resources to the Mayor and local authorities along with responsibility? Or is the ‘Big Society’ about cost cutting at the centre and passing the buck?”

4. Transport: Problems and solutions

• ‘Road transport is often the most significant factor in determining levels of NO2 pollution in towns and cities, accounting for as much as 70% to 80% of concentrations of NO2 in some hotspots.’ Para 8
• ‘We are looking at all options for how to further reduce emissions from transport.’ Para 57
• ‘Defra is also working with DfT to investigate measures which would reduce harmful emissions from HGV’s and buses in particular.’ Para 58
• ‘Defra is working with local authority delivery partners and with the DfT to investigate the Committee’s recommendation to develop a national framework for low emission zones (LEZs)’. Para 68

BUT: “Germany had some 40 inner city LEZs in place by the end of 2009 and Berlin says it is ‘the most effective single measure’ to improve air quality in the city. Why is the UK still dithering when it should be learning from Germany? It is simple: we need to ban pre-Euro 4 diesel vehicles (and the oldest petrol vehicles) from the most polluted parts of our cities and tighten the LEZ standards to Euro 6 as soon as possible. Yet again, the UK is paralysed by analysis and its own ‘gold plating’.”

5. Building public understanding of poor air quality

• ‘Government very much agrees that more needs to be done on communication of health impacts. It is important to make clear the benefits of improving air quality to the public and better communication of this is needed.’ Para 18
• ‘The Government agrees that it is important not only to make it easier for people to understand how they can reduce their own exposure to air pollution but also to make clear they can reduce their contribution to emissions of dangerous pollutants including through personal or business choices made on transport and energy use. This would improve their own and other people’s health.’ Para 43
• ‘A research report into the consumer response to the air quality banding systems will be published in spring 2011.’ Para 43
• ‘The DfT will review the content of the Vehicle Certification Agency’s New Car Fuel Consumption and Emissions Figures booklet and website.’ Para 43
• ‘It should be noted that all communication activity will need to take account of spending constraints, including for example, the limitations on national campaigning activity announced by the Chancellor on 22 June.’ Para 48

BUT: “We need new health alert bandings that warn people about short and long-term exposure to the range of air pollutants where they live (and work) (given the long-term impacts are much greater than the short-term impacts) and align with the legal framework where it is tighter.”

BUT: “The Government is being penny wise, pound foolish if it bans spending on a major national media campaign to build public understanding of poor air quality with a focus on mitigation and adaptation. Behavioural change typically results in savings not costs whereas the remaining technology solutions are requiring greater and greater cost to achieve smaller and smaller benefits.”

EAC urged to launch urgent new inquiry into air quality

Simon Birkett said: “The overwhelming impression created by the Government’s response to the excellent EAC Report on Air Quality in the UK is that the whole of Government is still in a muddle about how and when it will comply fully with its current legal and moral duties to protect members of the public.

“Clean Air in London urges the EAC to look again urgently at air quality with a major review over the spring and summer of 2011”. This urgent second inquiry should consider the:

i. UK’s success or failure complying in full with the PM10 limit values including the role of the Mayor of London;
ii. UK’s ongoing failure to comply with the NO2 limit values (i.e. since 1 January 2010) and the maximum margin of tolerance that would apply if the UK succeeds in obtaining a time extension;
iii. UK’s consultation on its application for a time extension to comply with NO2 limit values;
iv. UK’s progress in complying with legal obligations for PM2.5 and other harmful air pollutants;
v. UK’s progress in complying with its wider air pollution obligations e.g. the National Emissions Ceilings Directive, the Gothenburg Protocol and related legislation;
vi. need to update UK legislation to align efforts to comply with EU air quality obligations;
vii. contribution by the Prime Minister, DECC, DCLG, DH, HMT and BIS together with Defra and DfT to improving air quality; and
viii. Government’s success or failure in communicating the full health impact of poor air quality to members of the public by the time of the second inquiry including the actions people can take to mitigate air pollution and adapt to minimise its effects.   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 15 September 2010

‘Clean Air in London’ welcomes the first official confirmation that “calculations that suggest that as many as 35,000 to 50,000 deaths per year can be attributed to long-term exposure to fine particles are correct arithmetically but require careful interpretation”

‘Clean Air in London’ calls for local such estimates to be published for the whole UK with whatever careful explanations are necessary

Which community does not want to know an estimate for the number of premature deaths in it due to poor air quality in the way London now
knows these numbers for each ward?

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) has confirmed today that “calculations that suggest that as many as 35,000 to 50,000 deaths per year can be attributed to long-term exposure to fine particles are correct arithmetically but require careful interpretation”. See:

http://www.hpa.org.uk/NewsCentre/NationalPressReleases/2010PressReleases/100915Healtheffetsofairpollution/

The HPA recommends instead the use of estimates of: total years of life lost nationally; or the average loss in life expectancy for the whole population.

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL), said:

“After the previous Government was responsible for one of the worst public health failings or ‘cover-ups’ by a government in modern history, CCAL warmly welcomes the first official confirmation that the calculated numbers of premature deaths due to poor air quality, referred to by Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee earlier this year, are correct.

“CCAL urges the new Government to publish the calculated number of premature deaths for each local area (as the Mayor of London has done) across the UK for a particular year (e.g. 2009) or years with whatever careful explanations and/or caveats it considers necessary.

“CCAL believes that local estimates of premature or attributable deaths due to poor air quality (as used, for example, to illustrate the health impact of alcoholism, obesity or smoking) give the public – particularly those living in cities – a much better sense of the dangers of poor air quality than national statistics which inevitably include those living in clean air.

“CCAL would like to see estimates for the number of premature deaths should be published together with other metrics such as: average national impact (e.g. six to eight months of life lost on average across the whole UK population); total years of life lost nationally (e.g. 32.4 million life years); and average years of life lost per victim (e.g. up to nine years). In CCAL’s view, different metrics can be more or less suitable for different audiences and efforts should be made to couch explanations and caveats to each audience accordingly.

“It is still very odd that the previous UK Government failed to disclose such estimates given they have been published in recent years by the European Commission, the European Environment Agency, the United States’ Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organisation.

“Which community in the UK does not want to know a ‘best estimate’ for number of premature or attributable deaths in it due to poor air quality as London now knows these numbers for each ward?”

ENDS   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 2 August 2010


Abolishing Western Extension Zone would increase London’s illegal air pollution levels

Campaign for Better Transport, Campaign for Clean Air in London, ClientEarth, Environmental Protection UK and Friends of the Earth condemn proposal to remove WEZ and argue consultation is invalid

NOTICE: Please note that the main attachments to this Campaign Update are subject to Transport for London (TfL) copyright unless otherwise shown. TfL has asked CCAL to note that ‘these documents cannot be considered to be current as they were produced in the development of the draft [Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy (MAQS)]. In some cases, further analysis has been undertaken and the information contained in these documents has been superseded by that contained in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and draft MAQS’. ENDS

The Mayor of London’s proposal to remove the Western Extension of the Congestion Charging Zone (WEZ) is condemned by air quality, transport and environment groups Note 1, who say, among other things, it would increase air pollution and could result in European air quality laws being broken.

Transport for London (TfL) acknowledges that levels of two of the worst air pollutants, dangerous airborne particles (PM10) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), would increase, on average across the whole WEZ area, by some 3.5% and 2.5% respectively.

TfL admits also that transport emissions of the climate change gas, carbon dioxide, would go up in the WEZ area by around 5%, on average, if the WEZ is abolished. Abolition would also mean the loss of £55 million of net income to TfL now used to support public transport, road safety, walking and cycling schemes. The introduction of the WEZ led to a reduction of about 30,000 in the number of motor vehicles entering the zone each day and this is likely to be reversed as are increases in the number of people travelling by bus, on foot and by bicycle.

In several parts of west London, air quality standards are either being breached or only just being met, so any measures which would lead to a deterioration in air quality must be accompanied by full mitigation measures to avoid further breaches of European air quality laws. The groups argue that the measures proposed by the Mayor are inadequate.

Further, the groups argue that the current consultation Note 2 is invalid because, amongst other things, insufficient information has been provided in the consultation documents about increases in dangerous air pollution, and their likely health and legal impacts, which would result from the abolition of the WEZ Note 3.

Quotes:

Richard Bourn, London Campaigner at Campaign for Better Transport, said:

“The Mayor should scrap the proposal to abolish the WEZ. This will save lives and help protect London's hard-won, world-wide reputation for progressive transport policies.”

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London, said:

“Removing the WEZ is the ‘daftest’ of the Mayor’s ‘daft’ transport policies. With huge air quality problems, London needs to be moving forwards not backwards. On the basis of the information provided, the Mayor and TfL should reject the proposal to remove the WEZ.”

Alan Andrews, health and environment lawyer for ClientEarth said:

“London is consistently breaching legal limits on air pollution, which seriously affects Londoners’ health. If the mayor removes the WEZ, he will leave himself with a mountain to climb if he is to bring London's air pollution under control.”

Ed Dearnley, Policy Officer at Environmental Protection UK, said:

“The WEZ is a key measure for improving air quality in central London. Removing it would send air quality in the wrong direction, meaning expensive remedial actions would be needed to bring air quality up to the legally binding, health based European targets that central London was already struggling to meet. In the meantime the health of Londoners would suffer as thousands more vehicles enter the former WEZ area every day.”

Jenny Bates, Friends of the Earth London Campaigner, said:

“The WEZ has been successful in cutting traffic in the area and TfL admits its abolition would mean worse air pollution and climate change emissions as traffic returned. It is unacceptable for the Mayor to abolish the WEZ when other measures currently proposed do not leave London on track to meet EU legal air pollution limits or its own climate change targets.”

Notes:

1. The groups are Campaign for Better Transport, Campaign for Clean Air in London, ClientEarth, Environmental Protection UK and Friends of the Earth.

2. The deadline for consultation responses on the proposed changes to the Congestion Charge is Monday 2 August. Views can be submitted by email to CChargeConsultation@tfl.gov.uk or online at:

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/roadusers/congestioncharging/consultation/default.aspx

Key elements of the Mayor’s proposals, put forward by Transport for London (TfL), include:

• Removing the WEZ formally from 3 January 2011
• Increasing the daily charge in the Central Congestion Charging Zone (CCCZ) to £10 (£9 with ‘Auto Pay’)
• Residents in the WEZ area losing their 90% discount for travelling in the remaining CCCZ
• Replacing the Alternative Fuel Discount with a Greener Vehicle Discount which would provide a 100% discount to cars emitting 100g/km or less of CO2 and meet the Euro 5 standard

3. For full consultation details see:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/15520.aspx

4. For impacts see also Table 3.3, page 20:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/appendix-e-report-on-the-removal-of-the-western-extension-zone.pdf

5. The Mayor’s draft Air Quality Strategy acknowledges that around 4,300 premature deaths a year in London are caused by air pollution which disproportionately affects those in deprived areas near main roads and vulnerable groups such as older people and people with certain medical conditions.   more »

URGENT - ACTION REQUIRED BY 2 AUGUST 2010

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 21 June 2010

Removing western extension of congestion charging zone is ‘daftest’ of Mayor’s ‘daft’ transport policies

The Mayor of London (Mayor) has launched the final consultation on his plans to remove the western extension of the congestion charge (WEZ) (Note 1). The final deadline for comments is 2 August 2010. Your views can be submitted by email to CChargeConsultation@tfl.gov.uk or online at:

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/roadusers/congestioncharging/consultation/default.aspx

Key elements of the Mayor’s proposals, put forward by Transport for London (TfL), include:

• Removing the WEZ formally from 3 January 2011
• Increasing the daily charge in the Central Congestion Charging Zone (CCCZ) to £10 (£9 with ‘Auto Pay’)
• Residents in the WEZ area losing their 90% discount for travelling in the remaining CCCZ
• Replacing the Alternative Fuel Discount with a Greener Vehicle Discount which would provide a 100% discount to cars emitting 100g/km or less of CO2 and meet the Euro 5 standard

The Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) strongly opposes the Mayor’s proposal to remove the WEZ and reckons it is the ‘daftest’ of the Mayor’s ‘daft’ transport policies. Key reasons include:

1. Harmful emissions would rise by up to 8%: Emissions of the most harmful air pollutants would increase by between 3% and 8% in the WEZ area (which compares with an expected 13% reduction only between 2008 and 2011 across all London in the Mayor’s draft Air Quality Strategy) Note 2;

2. Congestion would increase by up to 21%: Congestion would increase by 15% to 21% within the WEZ area. The consultation document admits congestion would be worse than before the WEZ was introduced in part because local road capacity has reduced since 2007. Vehicles at 5 mph are about twice as polluting as those travelling at 20 mph (e.g. when congestion is lighter);

3. It would take years to regain WEZ benefits: The adverse impacts of removing the WEZ would only be offset ‘over time’. TfL cites mitigating measures that may enter into force from 2012…;

4. 48,000 people would lose their 90% discount: 48,000 people in the WEZ area are currently registered for the residents’ discount and would lose their 90% discount to drive in the CCCZ; and

5. £55 million net income per year: Removing the WEZ would reduce net income for London transport by £55 million. That must impact negatively on other transport projects.

Simon Birkett, Founder of CCAL, said: “Removing the WEZ is the ‘daftest’ of the Mayor’s ‘daft’ transport policies. With huge air quality and congestion problems, London needs to be moving forwards not backwards. The Campaign for Clean Air in London urges the silent majority to respond to the Mayor’s final consultation and oppose the removal of the WEZ.”

Notes:

1. For full consultation details see: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/15520.aspx

2. For impacts see Table 3.3, page 20: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/appendix-e-report-on-the-removal-of-the-western-extension-zone.pdf   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 29 June 2010

Mayor Johnson publishes health study with first official breakdown by ward across Greater London of his estimate of 4,267 premature deaths in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles

‘Clean Air in London’ estimate of up to 8,000 premature deaths also confirmed

Mayor Johnson has published his health study into the impact of poor air quality on Londoners. See:

http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Health_Study_%20Report.pdf

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL), said:

“Mayor Johnson is to be congratulated for publishing (even belatedly) his health study with a breakdown for every ward across Greater London of his estimate of 4,267 premature deaths a year due partly to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles. This report paints a shocking picture of the Olympic city.

“Recognising the importance of this new information, the Mayor has today delayed by three weeks the closing date for the consultation on his draft Air Quality Strategy (draft AQS) until 13 August.

“For the first time every person, ward councillor and politician across London can see average levels of fine airborne particles in their ward and the premature deaths linked to it. The report also publishes a range of 756 to 7,965 with the ‘best’ estimate of 4,267 premature deaths. It confirms CCAL’s estimate of up to 8,000 premature deaths in London due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles.

“This report makes clear the worst air quality and greatest legal breaches occur in inner London and near our busiest roads. For the first time though it shows that air pollution is a problem throughout London. It may therefore come as a surprise to some in outer London who thought air pollution was not their problem. I urge people to see what the health study shows for their local area.

“This report will have major ramifications for years to come. First, we need a major campaign to build public understanding of the health impact of poor air quality so people know how to protect themselves and reduce air pollution for everyone. Second, we need a much more ambitious air quality strategy from the Mayor (with urgent bold measures including much cleaner taxis, buses and one or more additional inner low emission zones (like the 40 Germany had by the end of last year)). Third the new Government must publish similar premature death estimates for the UK as a whole (in contrast to the failing or ‘cover-up’ by the previous Government, which steadfastly refused to do so), as demanded by Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee in March this year, and publish redacted information hiding details around legal action from the European Commission about UK breaches of air quality laws every year since 2005.

“Finally, Transport for London (TfL) which yesterday extended the consultation on the postponement of Phase 3 of the low emission zone (LEZ3) (due to ‘recent technical problems with the public consultation inbox’) by six days to 4 July must extend that consultation by a further three weeks or more to allow Londoners time to see this health study and object to the delay of this important measure intended to protect people across London.

“CCAL will continue pressing the Mayor and TfL to release other information relating to actual and possible breaches of air quality laws that should also have been published with each of the ongoing three consultations (LEZ3, draft AQS and removal of the western extension of the congestion charging zone).

“Dr Brian Miller, the author of the health study, must also be thanked and congratulated for this groundbreaking work.”

ENDS

Note:

The health impact of short-term and long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles is believed to overlap to some extent although long-term exposure causes many more premature deaths than short-term exposure. Premature deaths can also be caused by short-term exposure to sulphur dioxide and/or ozone.   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 3 June 2010


European Commission singles out United Kingdom with final written warning over levels of dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London and Gibraltar

‘Clean Air in London’ warmly welcomes the European Commission’s action and says it must act as a wake-up call to the new Government which has already watered-down bold Liberal Democrat manifesto commitments on air quality

EU air quality laws for PM10, in legislation since 1999, have been breached in London every year since they entered into force in January 2005. Similar laws for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a toxic gas, were breached in London within weeks of entering into force in January 2010. No sign of compliance before 2012 Olympics (or thereafter)


European Commission announcement

The European Commission is pursuing legal action against the UK for failing to comply with EU air quality standards for dangerous airborne particles (PM10). These particles, emitted mainly by industry, traffic and domestic heating, may have negative effects on health leading to asthma, cardiovascular problems, lung cancer and premature death. A second and final written warning has been sent to the UK for still exceeding the limit values for PM10 in London and Gibraltar. See:

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/687&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

Final warning for UK over PM10 levels

Environment Commissioner Janez Potočnik said: “Air pollution is bad for our health. It reduces human life expectancy by more than eight months on average and by more than two years in the most polluted cities and regions. Member States must comply with EU air quality standards quickly and reduce air pollutant emissions.”

The Commission started this legal action because a number of zones in the UK were exceeding the PM10 limit values in 2005, 2006 and 2007. The Commission is now sending a final warning to the UK for breaching EU air quality standards. According to the latest data (provided in September 2009), two areas, namely London and Gibraltar, exceeded the daily limit value for PM10 in 2008. Gibraltar also exceeded the annual mean limit value for PM10 in 2008.

This is the latest in a series of legal actions taken by the Commission against Member States following the entry into force in June 2008 of the new EU Air Quality Directive. The Directive allows Member States to request, under certain conditions and for specific parts of the country, limited extra time to meet the PM10 standards which have been in force since 2005.

First warning letters were sent at the beginning of 2009 to Member States that had not by then submitted notifications for time extensions or had not notified the Commission about all air quality zones exceeding the limit values for PM10. As a result, most Member States involved submitted notifications for a time extension.

The UK submitted an exemption request for eight zones including London. However, the Commission did not consider the exemption justified, as seven out of the eight zones already complied with the limit values. For London, the Commission considered that the UK had not shown that compliance with the daily PM10 limit value would be achieved by the time the exemption period expired in 2011. The UK has recently sent a further exemption request for London, which is still under assessment. However, given that zones still exceed the PM10 limit values, the Commission is sending the UK a final warning (Case number: 2008/2205). If the UK fails to take the necessary measures to comply with the legislation, the Commission could refer the case to the European Court of Justice.

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London, said:

“The Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) warmly welcomes the European Commission’s much needed escalation of legal action against the UK for continuing to breach air quality laws that have been in legislation since 1999 and required to be met since January 2005.

“It is only surprising that the Commission has patiently waited more than 16 months to move from the first to the second stage of legal action. In future, it must escalate action much faster since UK government’s seem to understand nothing else.

“The dying act of the last Government, on 3 May 2010, was to reapply for a time extension until 2011 to comply with air quality laws for dangerous airborne particles when it must have known its new case is based on little more than the assertion “we expect to comply by 2011” (with the new Government, the Mayor and the European Commission set to take the blame when the UK breaches this standard in London in late 2011 as it surely will). Ridiculously, for example, the Government’s plan (lodged on 3 May) assumed that: Phase 3 of the low emission zone (LEZ3) will be postponed until 2012 (i.e. pre-judging a consultation on a planned measure); and the western extension of the congestion charge zone (WEZ) will remain (i.e. not pre-judging a consultation on the removal of a successful existing measure on which the Mayor has (rashly) ‘staked his colours’). CCAL will be urging the Commission to reject the UK’s reapplication.

“Will the new Government continue to claim litigation privilege to stop the disclosure of redacted sections of ministerial briefing papers after rulings by the Information Commissioner’s Office and more recently the Information Tribunal? Even the Government admits that those redacted sections, if disclosed, could undermine its ability to defend itself against the Commission’s legal action which has been escalated today. What is the Government hiding?

“The Mayor of London is no better: his draft Air Quality Strategy is riddled with wishful thinking; and he continues deliberately to take backward steps on air quality, particularly in respect of transport, when rapid leaps forward are required. In that respect, for example, the removal of the WEZ would be a ‘double whammy’ because air quality will worsen and Transport for London will lose over £55m of net income. The best thing the Mayor has done on air quality is to tell us the scale of the problem - 4,300 premature deaths per year in London due, at least in part, to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles. And he still refuses to say how that number is calculated or release ward by ward and borough by borough breakdowns as CCAL has requested under Freedom of Information rules. Why has the Mayor quietly extended the deadline for responses to his draft Air Quality Strategy from 20 June to 23 July 2010?

“The Commission’s action is a welcome warning shot across the bows of the incoming coalition Government that committed weakly, in its coalition document, to “work towards full compliance with European Air Quality standards” i.e. without acknowledging any responsibility for complying with these laws and with no deadline specified. At least the Liberal Democrat manifesto had said “We will aim to fully meet European air quality targets by 2012”. Where are those bold words now?

“Let’s not forget either that the UK breached air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a toxic gas, for a whole year in London within weeks of the 1999 standard entering into legal force in January 2010.

“We need: the Government to respond immediately by publishing national and regional estimates for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles (as the House of Commons cross-party Environmental Audit Committee demanded in March this year); and the Government and the Mayor to introduce urgently meaningful measures that will tackle a problem causing more early deaths than alcoholism, obesity or passive smoking. Action now would have the added benefit of kick-starting green industries.

“We have only UK political leaders to blame for: today’s final written warning from the European Commission; and the wasteful prospect, in due course after Court action, of unlimited lump sum and daily fines that could total £300 million.”   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 11 May 2010


‘Clean Air in London’ (CCAL) wins at Information Tribunal after Government’s counsel admits Tribunal’s ruling means “it does not have much of an appeal left”

Government plans to seek permission for a further appeal to stop release of redacted sections of Ministerial briefing papers

CCAL believes redacted sections are likely to highlight: weaknesses in Government’s case against legal action by European Commission for breaching air quality laws; and difficulties Government has had agreeing a co-ordinated approach with Mayor Johnson

Government has today re-applied for a time extension until June 2011 to comply with the EU daily limit value for dangerous airborne particles (PM10)


Earlier today, the First Tier Information Tribunal began hearing an appeal by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs against an Order by the Information Commissioner's Office on 2 November 2009 for it to release all information requested by the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) on 22 January 2009. CCAL’s original request was for:

“...a copy of any minutes, papers, correspondence or other material relating directly to any meeting (including sent subsequent to it) that takes places between Lord Hunt and Mayor Johnson. I believe the meeting may include discussions about the western extension of the congestion charging zone and air quality”.

CCAL’s barristers asked the Information Tribunal to reject the Government’s attempt to raise new legal arguments late in the appeal process. The Government admitted there were no special reasons why the Tribunal should consider the arguments and that the only reason it had not made them earlier was an error. The Tribunal ruled within minutes that the Government was not allowed to run the new arguments.

As a result, the Government’s barrister admitted, in open court, that "it does not have much of an appeal left” and said it intends to seek permission to appeal the Tribunal’s ruling.

The Tribunal has said it intends to publish written reasons for its decision before the end of this week after which the Government is expected to lodge formally its application for permission to appeal. If the appeal is granted, it would be heard by the Upper Tier of the Information Tribunal.

Quotes:

Simon Birkett, Founder of CCAL, said:

“It is amazing the Government has twice now refused to release this information to the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) and twice now appealed decisions against it: first by the Information Commissioner’s Office and now by the Information Tribunal.

“Again and again, the Government is stalling and making excuses. After obtaining three tranches of the requested information, the remaining information CCAL is seeking is likely to highlight: weaknesses in the Government’s case against legal action by the European Commission for breaching air quality laws; and the difficulties the Government has had in agreeing a co-ordinated approach with the Mayor of London so that credible information and plans could be submitted to the European Commission. Worryingly, it is clear from the Ministerial briefing material already released to CCAL, Ministers and officials gave little or no thought to the scale of the health impacts of poor air quality in London when they were preparing to meet Mayor Johnson in January 2009.

“With the: Mayor saying, yesterday, he plans to launch final consultations in May about the removal of the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) and the postponement of the third phase of the London low emission zone (LEZ3); and Government reapplying today for a time extension to comply with the European Union (EU) daily limit value for dangerous airborne particles (PM10), there has never been greater public interest in seeing the information the Government is hiding.

“The Government is clearly pursuing delay for delay’s sake so that:

• LEZ3 will be postponed;
• the WEZ will be removed;
• its time extension application will be granted; and
• legal action over PM10 will be avoided

before this information is released.

“How many times does the Government have to be told it is in the wrong before it discloses key information relating to harmful emissions and the protection of public health in London?

“It is ironic the Government has re-applied today for a time extension to comply with the EU daily limit value for PM10 in London on the same day it has lost again its fight to keep secret evidence which may show the European Commission was misinformed or mislead by the Government in its original application to the Commission. Bizarrely, the reapplication assumes LEZ3 will be postponed until 2012 but not that the WEZ will be removed.

“Finally, CCAL wishes to thank again its legal team comprising leading barristers, Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John, and Phil Michaels, Head of Legal at Friends of the Earth. Without this tremendous legal team, CCAL would never have been able to win this case.”

Notes:

1. Full details of CCAL’s battle to obtain information around Ministerial meeting with Mayor Johnson on air quality, including Ministerial briefing papers, can be seen at:

http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2010/4/28/4516369.html

2. The Government’s reapplication for a time extension to comply with EU daily limit value for PM10 in London is attached.

   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 28 April 2010


‘Clean Air in London’ is joining Information Commissioner’s Office at Information Tribunal on 11 and 12 May to fight Government appeal against Order to release details including Ministerial briefings relating to its January 2009 meeting with Mayor Johnson

‘Clean Air in London’s’ excellent legal team includes barristers, Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John, and Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice Centre

Government has released information, in three stages, but key elements still ‘redacted’

Evidence so far suggests Government: had failed to communicate, even internally, the health impact of poor air quality in 2009 (or later); and may have mislead the European Commission in its time extension notification for PM10 and/or during infraction action


‘Clean Air in London’ has spent 15 months fighting to uncover Ministerial briefings

The Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) submitted a request to the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act and/or Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) on 22 January 2009. CCAL requested:

“...a copy of any minutes, papers, correspondence or other material relating directly to any meeting (including sent subsequent to it) that takes places between Lord Hunt and Mayor Johnson. I believe the meeting may include discussions about the western extension of the congestion charging zone and air quality”.

The Government is under a legal duty to respond to such requests within 20 working days. On 1 April 2009, the Government rejected CCAL’s request in full. On 1 May 2009, CCAL called for a review of the decision and this was rejected, again not within the statutory 20 working days but on 15 September 2009.

CCAL lodged a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) on 3 October 2009 asking the ICO to consider the case urgently because of the public health issues involved and the fact the UK was: applying to the European Commission for a time extension to comply with European Union (EU) limit values for dangerous airborne particles (PM10); and already subject to infraction action. The ICO responded, with almost unprecedented urgency, no doubt because of the seriousness of the issues involved, and ordered Defra to release all the information requested by CCAL. Defra rejected this request and lodged an appeal against the ICO’s decision on 1 December 2009.

On 24 December 2009, Government lawyers sent (by first class post) a first tranche of information to CCAL. In response to a separate and later FOI/EIR request, the Greater London Authority (GLA) released promptly, on 11 March 2010, a copy of the letter from Lord Hunt to Mayor Johnson dated 5 February 2009 (which was one of the documents CCAL had been seeking) and the Mayor’s response to Lord Hunt dated 16 March 2009. Later the same day, the Government chose to release suddenly to CCAL the same Lord Hunt letter.

Defra released a third tranche of information on 8 April 2010, a few days after receiving CCAL’s 31 page Witness Statement which attached 37 annexes (totalling over 350 pages of evidence), which included Ministerial briefing papers and emails between senior Government officials. Key sections are blacked out (or ‘redacted’) in different documents. All these documents are being published with this Campaign Update for the first time.

A particular focus of the information released so far relates to the Government’s approach to: the Mayor’s proposed removal of the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ); the Mayor’s suspension of Phase 3 of the London low emission zone (LEZ3); the process to seek time extensions to comply with EU limit values for PM10 and nitrogen dioxide (NO2); and a ‘defensive’ briefing for Ministers on the Government’s proposed expansion of Heathrow.

CCAL is keen to understand also whether the Government has acted responsibly in: seeking a time extension to comply with EU limit values for PM10 (and/or NO2); and defending the UK from infraction proceedings, launched by the European Commission on 29 January 2009, in relation to breaches since 2005 of EU limit values for PM10.

The Information Tribunal is due to hear Defra’s appeal in London on 11 and 12 May 2010. The Information Commissioner’s Office is the ‘Respondent’ and Simon Birkett, Founder of CCAL, has been joined as an ‘Additional Party’ at his request.

CCAL is advised on a pro bono basis by barristers, Gerry Facenna and Laura Elizabeth John, and Phil Michaels, Head of Legal at Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice Centre.

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London, said:

“The Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) lodged its request for information on 22 January 2009 in a bid to uncover crucial information relating to Ministerial briefings about air quality in London ahead of a key ‘political’ meeting between Lord Hunt and Mayor Johnson.

“CCAL would never have been able to challenge the Government’s persistent stalling and refusal, over some 15 months, to release information prepared for these air quality meetings without decisive advice from Gerry and Laura and then the backing of Phil Michaels and his outstanding legal team at Friends of the Earth’s Rights and Justice Centre.

“CCAL is keen to understand, not least, whether the UK Government has acted responsibly in: seeking a time extension to comply with EU limit values for PM10 (and/or NO2); and defending the UK from infraction proceedings, launched by the European Commission on 29 January 2009, in relation to breaches since 2005 of EU limit values for PM10.

“It seems astonishing, just months after CCAL disclosed details of one of the biggest public health failings or ‘cover-ups’ by a Government in modern history and the European Commission rejected the UK’s application for an extension of time for PM10 due to ‘significant uncertainty’, that the Government is still fighting the release of information which relates directly to the same area of public health and full compliance with air quality laws.

“CCAL is determined to find out about Ministers’ understanding of and approach to: the impact on public health of poor air quality in London; the Government’s obligations under European Union (EU) laws to ensure ambient air quality; and the need for the Secretary of State to issue directions to the Mayor of London under section 363 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 if the Mayor continues to take decisions that jeopardise the UK’s ability to achieve EU limit values in London (e.g. by removing the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) and/or delaying Phase 3 of the London low emission zone (LEZ3)).

“The third tranche of information just released by the Government (within days of receiving CCAL’s Witness Statement together with a barrage of supporting evidence), which still includes many ‘blacked out’ (or redacted) sections, provides ample evidence – in CCAL’s view – to suggest the Government: had not grasped adequately the scale or urgency of the public health threat posed by poor air quality by 2009 (or later); and may have mislead the European Commission when it submitted its time extension notification seeking a delay until 11 June 2011 to comply with EU limit values for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) and/or in defending the UK from infraction proceedings.

“A picture is emerging of a Government which: has failed to communicate the dangers of poor air quality internally within Government, never mind to the general public; is more concerned with delaying compliance with air quality laws than achieving it; and seems to want to avoid a row with the Mayor even when he is taking one or more backwards steps on key air quality measures and threatens to jeopardise the UK’s legal case for a time extension on PM10. Is there any ‘political will’ in Government to achieve full compliance with air quality laws?

“It is time the Government accepted the overwhelming public interest in favour of it releasing immediately the remaining information. It is long past time we were told the truth.”   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 28 March 2010

Mayor Johnson says 4,300 premature deaths a year in London are linked to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles at an annual cost of up to £2 billion

Mayor of London has today joined Parliament’s cross-party Environmental Audit Committee in calling on the Government to commit the resources necessary to reduce the enormous burden air pollution places on organisations such as the NHS and to implement national measures
where they are most effective

Mayor Johnson has made improving air quality in London a General Election issue by ‘throwing the gauntlet down’ and sending the Government a wish list of 14 measures it needs to take

Mayor Johnson publishes his draft Air Quality Strategy for public consultation

Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, has today published his draft Air Quality Strategy, ‘Clearing the Air’, for public consultation. See media release (with a link to the full document):

http://www.london.gov.uk/media/press_releases_mayoral/plans-announced-tackle-pollution-londons-dirtiest-roads

The consultation period will run until 20 June 2010.

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London, said:

“Mayor Johnson’s estimate of some 4,300 premature deaths a year in London due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles is far higher than unofficial estimates produced late last year by the Campaign for Clean Air in London Note. This is truly shocking news when compared to 2,600 deaths nationally due to road traffic accidents.

“Unlike the Government though, which has failed to publish or ‘covered-up’ a similar estimate for London and the UK as a whole, at least the Mayor is warning people about the full health impact of poor air quality. The Government’s omission represents one of the biggest public health failings or ‘cover-ups’ in modern history.

“Boris has made action on air quality a General Election issue by ‘throwing the gauntlet down’ to the Government by joining today with Parliament’s cross-party Environmental Audit Committee in calling on the Government to play its part finally in improving London’s awful air quality.

“However, Mayor Johnson's draft Air Quality Strategy, which includes 14 measures he wants the Government to take, represents more of a ‘wish list’ itself than a strategy to address one of the biggest public health crises in London. How many premature deaths will actually be avoided each year if the Mayor’s committed measures are implemented?

"The Mayor has published a ‘wish list’ not a strategy. He clearly:

• wishes he could delay compliance with laws for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) until 2011 instead of 2010 as required following the European Commission’s rejection of the Government’s application for a time extension last December

• wishes the Government would fund and implement 14 of the most important measures needed to improve air quality in London

• wishes the UK didn’t need to comply with hourly legal standards for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) which were breached in London for a whole year less than a month after entering into force on 1 January 2010

• wishes annual mean NO2 didn’t need to stay below 60 micrograms per cubic metre from January 2010 even if the UK gets a time extension until January 2015

• wishes removing the western extension of the congestion charging zone (WEZ) wouldn’t result in new breaches of the daily legal standard for PM10 in Brompton Road

• wishes the Government will fail to spot he is planning to sacrifice tens of millions of pounds of income (and making air quality worse) by removing the WEZ at the same time he is asking the Government for money and putting up bus fares

• wishes the weather was always mild and wet and London didn’t have hot summers like 2003 which is estimated to have resulted, in London, in an additional 46 to 212 premature deaths due to ozone and 85 from dangerous airborne particles

• wishes his ideas for action by 2020 would be enough to protect Londoners now and avoid embarrassment at the London 2012 Olympics

“The first ever official estimate in the UK for the full health impact of poor air quality must mark the start of much more vigorous efforts by the Mayor and the Government, working together, to protect our health.

ENDS

Note:

The Mayor says his estimate of premature deaths includes those due to all particles (i.e. including non-human sources) whereas the Campaign for Clean Air in London’s estimate of 3,460 in 2005 included only those due to anthropogenic sources (i.e. human sources). The Government recently estimated the non-anthropogenic level at just 1.418 micrograms per cubic metre in 2008.   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 22 March 2010


Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) must be congratulated on its hard-hitting inquiry and report into air quality: ‘Early deaths from air pollution shame UK’

‘Clean Air in London’ (CCAL) has unearthed one of the biggest public health failings, or ‘cover-ups’, by a government in modern history – no estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles.

EAC inquiry has confirmed ‘Clean Air in London’ estimate of 3,460 premature deaths (or up to 7,900) due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles in London in 2005 and around 35,000 (or up to 50,000) nationally. EAC tells Defra it must raise the profile of the issue by publicising the latest data on premature deaths more widely

‘Clean Air in London’ reiterates its call for the government to apologise for its failure to warn the public adequately about the dangers of poor air quality

The cross-party Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) congratulates Parliament’s powerful Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) on its hard-hitting inquiry and report into whether the UK has an effective strategy to comply with its air quality obligations. It is clear the UK does not have such a strategy.

The EAC’s report (Volume I) is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/environmental_audit_committee/inqairquality.cfm

Volume II (containing oral and written evidence) will be available on the Committee’s website from 11.00am approximately on Tuesday 23 March.

Quotes

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL), said:

“The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) must be congratulated on its hard hitting inquiry and report into air quality: ‘Early deaths from air pollution shame UK’. The EAC’s investigation has shown just how badly the UK has failed to develop an effective strategy to comply with its air quality obligations. The EAC’s inquiry has confirmed CCAL’s worst fears including its estimates for the number of premature deaths in London.

“The government should respond immediately by: giving Mayor Johnson full responsibility for complying in 2010 with limit values for dangerous airborne particles (PM10) in London; publishing its plans for complying with legal standards for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx); and communicating clearly estimates for the number of premature deaths due to poor air quality.

“Why has it taken an inquiry by one of Parliament’s most powerful Select Committees (supported by an excellent report by the National Audit Office) to get a government Minister to refer, for the very first time, to the possibility of 35,000 premature deaths in the UK in a year due to air pollution? Why has the government never published an estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles?

“The highest government number we have heard before was ‘up to 24,000 deaths per year (nine times more than traffic fatalities)’ – which was repeated in a Ministerial speech on 17 September 2009. A Freedom of Information request by CCAL confirmed the ‘up to 24,000’ number used in the speech last year was based on 1998 estimates for the health impact of ‘short-term’ exposure to air pollution (which comprised 8,100 premature deaths due to dangerous airborne particles; 3,500 due to sulphur dioxide; and between 700 and 12,500 due to ozone). It is clear the government knew as early as 2001 that long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles was responsible for many times more premature deaths than short-term exposure.

“Under intense questioning as part of this EAC inquiry, Professor Frank Kelly – one of the UK’s most respected health experts – confirmed the likelihood of around 35,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2005 due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles alone. Professor Kelly mentioned also a European estimate of some 50,000 for such deaths for the UK. Even allowing for some overlap between the number of premature deaths due to short-term and long-term exposure, and perhaps between different types of pollutants, it is clear the EAC inquiry has confirmed officially – for the first time – the full scale of the UK’s air quality problem. The EAC says people are dying up to nine years early in ‘hotspots’.

“We should remember too that, even if the UK achieved clean air tomorrow, people would still continue to die prematurely due to their earlier exposure to dangerous airborne particles. Only over time, as a population generation lived its whole life free from air pollution, would people reach their full potential life expectancy.

“It is very odd the government has never published an estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles in the UK. The government’s omission is particularly odd given the European Commission, the European Environment Agency, the US’s Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organisation have all published such numbers in recent years as part of their communications to warn the public about the dangers of air pollution.

“The Campaign for Clean Air in London is therefore repeating its call for the government to apologise for not warning the public, as it should have done, about the full extent of the health risks of poor air quality after its failure to publish, or its ‘covering-up’ of, an estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles. Evidence heard by the EAC has confirmed the estimates provided by CCAL to the EAC last December including those of 3,460 and up to 7,900 premature deaths due to dangerous airborne particles in London in 2005 alone.

“CCAL wishes to record its thanks particularly to: Tim Yeo MP (Chair, Conservative); Martin Horwood MP and Jo Swinson MP (Liberal Democrat); Mark Lazarowicz MP and Dr Desmond Turner MP (Labour); and Gordon Clarke, Nick Davies and Edward White for their outstanding contributions to this inquiry.”   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 23 February 2010

Government Minister acknowledges, for the very first time, the possibility of 35,000 premature deaths in a year due to air pollution in the UK

‘Clean Air in London’ urges Environmental Audit Committee to support call for government apology after its failure to publish, or ‘covering-up’ of, an estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles

Previous EAC oral evidence session confirmed ‘Clean Air in London’ estimate of 3,460 premature deaths (or up to 7,900) due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles in London in 2005 and around 35,000 nationally

The cross-party Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) congratulates Parliament’s powerful Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) again on the rapid progress of its hard hitting and effective inquiry into whether the UK has an effective strategy to comply with its air quality obligations. It is clear today the UK does not have such a strategy.

Environmental Audit Committee third and final oral evidence session

The EAC held its third and final oral evidence session today as part of its air quality inquiry. Those interviewed included:

• Jim Fitzpatrick MP, Minister for Food, Farming and Environment;

• Daniel Instone, Deputy Director, Atmosphere and Local Environment Programme;

• Tim Williamson, Air Quality Science and Evidence Team; and

• Robert Vaughan, National and Local Air Quality Strategy, Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs.

The webcast of the third oral evidence session can be seen at:

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=5914

Questions on the health impact of poor air quality begin at 19 minutes, 25 seconds.

Quotes:

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL), said:

“Why has it taken direct questioning by the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) to get a government Minister to refer, for the very first time, to the possibility of 35,000 premature deaths in the UK in a year due to air pollution?

“The highest government number we have heard before was ‘up to 24,000 deaths per year (nine times more than traffic fatalities)’ when the same Minister gave a speech on 17 September 2009. A Freedom of Information request by the Campaign for Clean Air in London confirmed the ‘up to 24,000’ number used in the speech last year was based on 1998 estimates for the health impact of air pollution (which themselves comprised 8,100 premature deaths due to short-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles; 3,500 due to sulphur dioxide; and between 700 and 12,500 due to ozone). It is clear the government knew as early as 2001 that long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles was responsible for many times more premature deaths than short-term exposure.

“Under intense questioning as part of the same EAC inquiry two weeks ago, Professor Frank Kelly – one of the UK’s most respected health experts – confirmed the likelihood of around 35,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2005 due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles. Professor Kelly mentioned also a European estimate of some 50,000 for such deaths for the UK. Even allowing for some overlap between the number of premature deaths due to short-term and long-term exposure, and perhaps between different types of pollutants, the EAC has finally unearthed the real impact of poor air quality in the UK.

“We should remember too that, even if the UK achieved clean air tomorrow, people would still continue to die prematurely due to their earlier exposure to dangerous airborne particles. Only over time, as a population generation lived its whole life free from air pollution, would people reach their full potential life expectancy.

“It is very odd the government has never published an estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles in the UK. The government’s omission is particularly odd given the European Commission, the European Environment Agency, the US’s Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organisation have all published such numbers in recent years as part of their communications to warn the public about the dangers of air pollution.

“The Campaign for Clean Air in London is therefore repeating its call for the government to apologise for not warning the public, as it should have done, about the full extent of the health risks of poor air quality after its failure to publish, or its ‘covering-up’ of, an estimate for the number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to dangerous airborne particles. The EAC may have uncovered, as CCAL predicted last December it would, one of the biggest public health failings by a government in modern history.”

Notes:

1. Environmental Audit Committee inquiry into air quality

The House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) announced on 21 October 2009 its inquiry into Air Quality. The purpose of the inquiry is to assess whether the government is developing an effective strategy for meeting its obligations under the EU Air Quality Directives.

Further details of the EAC’s inquiry into air quality, including its Terms of Reference, Next Evidence Session and Written Evidence received can be found on its homepage. See:

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/environmental_audit_committee/inqairquality.cfm

2. Memoranda submitted to the EAC’s air quality inquiry are available at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmenvaud/memo/airquality/contents.htm

A transcript of the oral evidence session will be available (in due course) on the EAC’s Reports and Publications webpage.

3. National Audit Office report on air quality

As a prelude to that inquiry, the EAC asked the National Audit Office (NAO) to prepare an overview of the UK’s performance to date in meeting various targets and limits for each air pollutant. The NAO has published today its report on air quality. See:

http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0910/eac_briefing_-_air_quality.aspx   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 9 February 2010


Parliament’s powerful Environmental Audit Committee unearths evidence of over a decade of government failings or ‘cover-ups’ over air quality premature deaths

Martin Horwood, Liberal Democrat MP for Cheltenham, obtains confirmation from expert that ‘Clean Air in London’s’ best estimate of 3,460 premature deaths (and up to 7,900) due to dangerous airborne particles in London in 2005 is correct

EAC establishes that government: should be referring to ‘premature deaths’ in line with international practice; and has been slow in updating air quality statistics

Communication campaign is needed urgently to boost public understanding of the dangers of poor air quality with advice on ‘mitigation’ and ‘adaptation’

The cross-party Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL) congratulates Parliament’s powerful Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) on the rapid progress of its hard hitting and effective inquiry into whether the UK has an effective strategy to comply with its air quality obligations. It is clear today the UK does not have such a strategy.

Environmental Audit Committee second oral evidence session

The EAC held its second oral evidence session today as part of its air quality inquiry. Those interviewed included:

• Dr Ian S McRae, Senior Technical Manager; Energy, Emissions and Air Pollution Group, Transport Research Laboratory;

• Professor Frank Kelly and Dr Gary Fuller of the Environmental Research Group, King’s College London; and

• Graham Pendlebury, Director, Environment and International Directorate; Iain Forbes, Head of Air Quality Branch; and Chris Parkin, Head of Engineering Standards Branch, Department for Transport

The webcast of the second oral evidence session can be seen at:

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=5844

Quotes:

Simon Birkett, Founder of the Campaign for Clean Air in London, said:

“Parliament’s powerful Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) has done its job today. The EAC has found, as the Campaign for Clean Air in London predicted it would, over a decade of government failings or ‘cover-ups’ over air quality premature deaths.

“In a nutshell there are two issues. First, why has the government not used – since 1998 – ‘premature deaths’ as a key metric when updating its assessments of the health impacts of air pollution (e.g. in 2001, 2006 and 2009)? Second, why has the government been so slow in updating its air quality statistics generally?

“It is becoming clear that the answer to both these questions is that the government knew it could not easily explain an estimate of 8,100 premature deaths due to dangerous airborne particles becoming 35,000 or more. The EAC has unearthed this picture today and Martin Horwood, of the Liberal Democrats, deserves special recognition for his dogged pursuit of the facts.

“The government’s letter of last Monday saying ‘There has not been a cover-up...’ is published on the Campaign’s website.

“Despite the government’s protestations, CCAL calls again on the government to apologise for not warning the public, as it should have done, about the full extent of the health risks of poor air quality after its failure to update, or its ‘covering-up’ of, over 250,000 premature deaths due to dangerous airborne particles over 10 years. This may be the one of the worst public health failings or ‘cover-ups’ in modern history.

“We need urgently a communication campaign to boost public understanding of the dangers of poor air quality. People should be advised about: ‘mitigation’, for example, to avoid – when they can – the most polluted streets when walking; and ‘adaptation’ such as choosing, where practicable, the least polluting means of travelling around.

“CCAL urges the EAC and others, such as the Mayor of London and the London Assembly, to support this call for a government apology.”   more »

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: 4 February 2010

Government says ‘there has not been a cover-up’ on air quality premature deaths

Government fails to: acknowledge importance of premature deaths as a key metric in communicating health impact of dangerous airborne particles to the public; or justify its slowness in updating crucial air quality statistics

‘Clean Air in London’ urges again Environmental Audit Committee to support call for government apology after failing to update, or covering-up of, over 250,000 premature deaths due to dangerous airborne articles over 10 years

‘Clean Air in London’ urges Mayor of London not to make the same mistakes

The government has written to the Campaign for Clean Air in London (CCAL), just days before the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) meets next Tuesday to take evidence as part of its inquiry into air quality, to say ‘there has not been a cover-up’ over air quality premature deaths. CCAL has published the government’s letter on its website with this Campaign Update.

The EAC has announced today it will take evidence from King’s College London and others.

Government makes its case for not updating premature death estimates since 1998

Simon Birkett, Founder of CCAL, said:

“We must welcome the government setting out, at last, its reasons for not updating estimates of premature deaths due to dangerous airborne particles since 1998. Justification is needed since the government has known since 2001 the health effects of long-term exposure are ‘considerably greater’ than the effects of short-term exposure that were quantified in 1998.

“In CCAL’s view, two points are particularly indefensible. First, the government’s persistent refusal to acknowledge the importance of premature deaths (aka ‘attributable’ or ‘brought forward’ deaths) as a key metric in communicating the health impact of dangerous airborne particles to the public. Its stance contrasts sharply, for example, with that of the European Environment Agency, the European Commission, the United States’ Environment Protection Agency and the World Health Organisation (WHO). Second, the government’s slowness in updating crucial air quality statistics.

“The government’s complacency is indefensible when 3,460 and up to 7,900 people are estimated by CCAL to have died prematurely due to dangerous airborne particles in London in 2005 alone. They may have died 9.8 years early on average.

“CCAL therefore calls again on the government to apologise for not warning the public, as it should have done, about the full extent of the health risks of poor air quality after its failure to update, or its ‘covering-up’ of, over 250,000 premature deaths due to dangerous airborne particles over 10 years. CCAL urges the EAC and others to support such a call.”

Further details of CCAL’s investigation are shown in the Appendix that follows.    more »