Morning:
4°c
Boris Johnson row with ministers over pollution ‘was covered up’
David Williams21.09.09
A row between Boris Johnson and ministers over spiralling air pollution in London is being covered up, campaigners claim.
Former air quality minister Lord Hunt met the Mayor in January, in a bid to head off a £300 million fine from the European Union after the capital exceeded airborne pollution limits.
The Government's plans to avoid the penalty were thrown into disarray by the Mayor's decision to scrap the western Congestion Charge zone next year and drop phase three of the capital's Low Emission Zone.
Lord Hunt was thought to be hoping to get a commitment of low emission replacements for these schemes, but the Mayor may have refused.
Simon Birkett, of the Campaign for Clean Air in London, said the meetings had remained cloaked in secrecy despite an eight-month battle to uncover the truth.
His Freedom of Information request to view minutes and correspondence covering the meeting was rejected.
He told the Standard: “If there is a major row between the Mayor and the Government which means that the health of the public will not be protected, then the people of London have a right to know.”
London has been in breach of EU legal standards for dangerous airborne particles since 2005. The campaign says most of the pollution is caused by diesel fumes.
The European Commission has begun legal proceedings against the UK and is expected to escalate its action unless Britain produces a new plan to combat air pollution in London. This could cost £300 million.
The Government applied for an exemption to avert the fines until 2011, giving more time to tackle soaring pollution. But then Mr Johnson scrapped the two zones.
The Government is thought to have told him it
expected him to replace the two schemes with something equally effective, or better.
Mr Birkett said: “The Government is clearly afraid that whatever is contained in correspondence and minutes detailing discussions with the Mayor could torpedo their hopes of getting an extension from the EC.
“Either Mr Johnson has blown the Government a raspberry and is refusing to co-operate, or the Government has threatened him with legal action. London should be told.”
The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has told Mr Birkett there was a “strong and countervailing public interest in preserving private space for discussion and consideration of issues within government”.
Reader views (20)
David Lonond
If you'd bothered to read Kimberley's post to which I was replying, then perhaps you'd have better understood the sarcasm...
- John, London
In the late forties and fifties the smog in london was far worse than it is now,due to coal fires etc,- so people were suffering from asthma sixty years ago,its nothing new,puss in boots along with dick whittington mentioned it in pepys diaries 600yrs ago this week.
- Drew Pension, Communist Britain.
The EU air quality limits were set for the UK as a whole in 1999 and I must point out that it is the Government, not the Mayor, that has refused to act over London’s poor air quality for the past 10 years, and still refuses to co-operate with the Mayor’s efforts to reduce air pollution in London.
As much as 40% of the harmful particulates (PM10) and 20% of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in London’s air originate from outside the capital, so it is imperative that action is taken at a national and local level to address this serious issue. However, we know that ministers have offered nothing in their meetings with the Mayor, throughout this year, despite the fact that the EU’s air quality limits were set 10 years ago.
Rather than evading the issue and seeking to identify red herrings, such as the cancellation of the Western Extension of the Congestion Charge or the suspension of phase three of the Low Emission Zone, both of which would have had a negligible effect on London’s poor air quality, it is time for the Government to finally own up to its responsibilities to the people of London. It could start by engaging with the Mayor instead of seeking to score points off him and by reversing its support for a third runway at Heathrow, one of London’s most heavily polluted areas.
- Gareth Bacon Am (Conservative Environment Spokesman, London Assembly), London, UK
John London
"Perhaps one day, if you work hard enough and are 'aspirational' enough, you'll own a convertible car like me - and so would like to drive around with the top down without choking on the air..."
No thanks John I don't want to look like a complete plank.
- David, Lonond
The EU air quality limits were set for the UK as a whole in 1999 and I must point out that it is the Government, not the Mayor, that has refused to act over London’s poor air quality for the past 10 years, and still refuses to co-operate with the Mayor’s efforts to reduce air pollution in London.
As much as 40% of the harmful particulates (PM10) and 20% of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in London’s air originate from outside the capital, so it is imperative that action is taken at a national and local level to address this serious issue. However, we know that ministers have offered nothing in their meetings with the Mayor, throughout this year, despite the fact that the EU’s air quality limits were set 10 years ago.
Rather evading the issue and seeking to identify red herrings, such as the cancellation of the Western Extension of the Congestion Charge or the suspension of phase three of the Low Emission Zone, both of which would have had a negligible effect on London’s poor air quality, it is time for the Government to finally own up to its responsibilities to the people of London. It could start by engaging with the Mayor instead of seeking to score points off him and by reversing its support for a third runway at Heathrow, one of London’s most heavily polluted areas.
- Gareth Bacon Am (Conservative Environment Spokesman, London Assembly), London, UK
Why doesn't Boris Johnson publish online three electoral ward maps of London?
The first should show the 14 wards which all had zero infant deaths recorded in the 6-year period 2002-2007 coloured green and the 22 wards with infant mortality rates ranging upwards from 10.0 per 1,000 live births coloured red and the remaining wards coloured in 2.0 per 1,000 intervals. The electoral ward with the highest infant death rate in London is Eastcote & East Ruislip, Hillingdon, where the 2002-20007 infant death rate is 13.9 per 1,000 live births
The second should show the electoral wards which had ten percent or more of live births in 2003-2005 weighed less than 2,500 grammes coloured red and the wards where less than five percent of such births coloured green.
The third map should show the wards which had standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) for deaths aged less than 85 years, from all causes, in 1999-2003, of 125 and above coloured red and the wards with SMRs of 75 and below coloured green. Any ward with SMR greater than 100 has a higher than average death rate and New Cross ward, Lewisham, has the highest rate in London with SMR=161.
New Cross ward is home to SELCHP incinerator and the red wards in above maps are clustered around incinerators.
Kind regards,
Michael Ryan,
Shrewsbury
- Michael Ryan, Shrewsbury
boris is a hypocrite. he might be against heathrows third runway (for populist reasons) but he gve the go ahead for the expansion of flights from london city airport. the two do not balance. london city airport is actually in london so boris could have done something about it - air quality levels around this airport are already 50% above eu targets- but boris went for the more populist and voter friendly option of opposing heathrow. after all he will not get many votes from the poorest people in london who happen to live in newham - where london city airport is based.
- Darren, newham
Anybody that jogs or cycles in the traditional London pollution has only themselves to blame for repertory disease. They should pay for their own NHS treatment for such problems as asthma and respect the Londoners traditional rights enjoyed by the fathers and their forefathers. A million tourists a year come into London knowing these problems and we should not discourage this income.
Keep low pollution zones where they belong - at Heathrow.
- Jack, East London
"The fact that we did suggests our priorities are not aligned with those of the environmentalism-first lobby."
Rubbish. If you look at what Boris said, he was extremely anxious to be seen as pro-environment, from opposing the 3rd Runway to new green buses to supporting a 'cleaner, greener London'. It's all on the record and I've heard him say it in person. Furthermore, postponing the LEZ, scrapping green transport projects and cutting the WEZ weren't in his manifesto, they're post-election decisions made by him and his advisors that *contradict* what he was elected on, and are much more in tune with the London borough Tories and the party hard right, neither of which has the electorate credibility of the Mayor. We should be holding him to the promises he made, not giving him a free pass to rip it up.
- Tom, London, UK
Does Kimberley's car have its own oxygen supply? I know that too many car drivers behave as though they are insulated from the outside world, but this would be a first! What does she think comes in through her air vents? (Unless she's teasing us, of course)
Being all for air quality, and never having driven into the zone uless compelled by work, I'd love to know what the EU would do with £300 million of our money: more world-class restaurants in Luxembourg would be the likeliest outcome.
I'd love to see some costings for making buses free at point of use, except for visitors, and Londoners charged an annual utility bill for riding on them. Plus a network of smaller buses to get people to the main routes.
- Mdj E10, london uk
Sadly, Kimberley's myopic and delusional comments are indicative of the deleterious effects that combustion engine exhaust fumes have on cognitive ability, which are particularly prevalent amongst individual road users in congested streets who inhale gases emitted from the vehicles preceding them (i.e. all that air pollution makes you stupid).
- C. Nichol, London
Kimberley, as someone who thinks that the EU should take their proposed £300m fine and 'go shove it', even I think your argument is utter, utter nonsense.
Perhaps one day, if you work hard enough and are 'aspirational' enough, you'll own a convertible car like me - and so would like to drive around with the top down without choking on the air...
As Stephen says, these 'fines' are nothing to do with solving the issues and are simply punitive taxes.
- John, London
Boris is committed to helping air quality with his planting trees scheme which will help. If Ken Livingstone was such a good Mayor as so many believe why did he not do anything to resolve air pollution to a safe limit in the eight years he was in charge? Boris can't work wonders in the eighteen months he has had.
- Sarah, London
If the EU do levy the fine then the Government fool that agreed to this environmental tax should have it taken away from their pension.
Unaccountable, unelected civil servants are "negotiating" targets with the EU without any discussion or knowledge of the electorate and certainly no upside to the tax paying public.
Wake up! The EU is negotiating all these targets as a new tax. Pretty soon we will be paying more in "fines" to the EU in our taxes than for front line services.
- Stephen, Swindon
If everyone used a car like myself there wouldn't be any need to be outdoors. People who cycle or walk everyone only have themselves to blame if they want to inflict damage to themselves by staying outside too long. Good on Boris for ignoring EU rules and helping aspiration people like myself who work hard to afford to own a car in London.
- Kimberley, London
Boris was pretty upfront about his intentions with regard to congestion and low emissions zones when he was asking us to elect him.
The fact that we did suggests our priorities are not aligned with those of the environmentalism-first lobby.
Why do we keep being told that we are wrong and everyone who has a green agenda is right?
In a recession, people’s priorities change, politicians and legislators really ought to accept that.
- St, London
If the EU does levy this fine, I do hope the government will take it from Boris' budget.
- Roy, England
"The campaign says most of the pollution is caused by diesel fumes. "
And before some petrolheaded windbag wades in on this, that's *car* fumes, not buses. Diesel car sales are markedly up in recent years while bus emissions are subject to far stringer controls thanks to compulsory Euro emissions standards. Unfortunately while diesels are far better for CO2 and economy, this comes at a cost in terms of other pollutants. The real solution is to encourage modal shift to walking, cycling and public transport, none of which is helped by the abolition of the CC Western Extension.
Still, perhaps more boroughs will get round the issue as Tory favourites Hammersmith & Fulham have done, and scrap their air quality monitoring stations. Trebles and tax cuts all round!
- Tom, London, UK
Politics aside, having lived in the countryside and polluted areas of London (how much black muck you have to clean from the window sills every few days is a good guide to the air quality), it is obvious that pollution not only effects ones health (in particular the life expectancy of children exposed during youth), but clarity of thought. Take a train out to the country and the second you get off, the air is sweet - and you'll think clearly like you never thought possible.
Londoners deserve it too, so Borris, why not start by getting more large vehicles to switch to electric?
- Oflife, Oxford & London
What should be done now is to organise a huge tree planting programme across London. There is no better way of cleaning the air. Our politicians should be asked why such simple and cheap action is not being taken.
- Simon Ellis, London E8
