Clean Air Zone questions
There’s an emergency scrutiny meeting on the city’s Clean Air Zone on 2 February 2021 (Groundhog Day). It is too late to ask questions of…
There’s an emergency scrutiny meeting on the city’s Clean Air Zone on 2 February 2021 (Groundhog Day). It is too late to ask questions of the meeting but I have put some comments together for committee members to consider.
Which Index of Multiple Deprivation data is the technical team using? A new set of measures was released in October 2019, which was just days ahead of the 5th of November 2019 cabinet meeting where the CAZ was decided on. I asked at Cabinet which year’s data was used and did not get a reply. As we can see from the comparison below, there has been a big difference in deprivation in relation to the quality of the local environment between 2015 and 2019.
2. In Members’ Questions and Mayor’s Responses in July 2019, Paula O’Rourke mentioned the UWE research that showed people in poorer areas own fewer cars, drive less and pollute less. She asked the mayor to ensure that this data was being used for the CAZ assessment by the technical officers. The mayor said he wasn’t involved. “It’s brainy people with computers” who run the technical models.
Cllr O’Rourke spent quite a while trying to get the mayor to even agree to look at the research and to use it to influence the CAZ. He refused. I’ve condensed it to three minutes in the following video.
3. In October 2020, the Council was consulting on the CAZ. In a highly leading Tweet, it suggested that people should say no to the CAZ because it would cost them money.
The Tweet said:
How do you feel about being charged to drive in Bristol?
We have recorded improvements in air quality with fewer cars & road changes improving traffic.
Can we maintain better air quality?
—
These leading questions were designed to provide answers of ‘no’ to being charged and that the council should just maintain better quality —this would suggest that no further changes would be needed.
In contrast to the council’s claim, however, the Centre for Cities produced data in December to show that Bristol’s air quality in October was higher than before the lockdown.
During the council’s campaign to get residents to say they don’t want a CAZ, the council’s claims were found to be erroneous. Their interests seem to be in avoiding charging people for driving even when lives are lost to air quality. What are their priorities and how can we be sure they want us to stay alive? Do the council acknowledge that illegal air quality levels are now higher than during lockdown and even before lockdown?
4. £375k was won by the council from the lottery for a community action fund to the climate change public engagement programme. Where has this money been used? In the most polluted areas, how can communities use this money? How can I reduce the number of cars that use Anchor Road, for example?
5. “Patients of black, Asian and minority ethnicity (BAME) are more likely to be admitted from regions of highest air pollution, housing quality and household overcrowding deprivation.”
The council’s own equality impact assessment for the CAZ shows that BAME lives are disproportionately affected by air pollution and will be saved by having a CAZ. Why is the mayor prioritising car drivers’ (more likely to be living in wealthier areas) wallets rather than the lives of residents (who are more likely to be living in poorer areas)?
