The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Gardiner of Kimble)
(Con) My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall repeat as
a Statement an Answer given to an Urgent Question in another place
by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, on improving transport
emissions in our urban areas. The Statement is as follows:...Request free trial
-
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Gardiner of Kimble)
(Con)
My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall repeat as a
Statement an Answer given to an Urgent Question in another
place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, on improving
transport emissions in our urban areas. The Statement is as
follows:
“Air pollution is the greatest environmental threat to human
health in this country and the fourth biggest public health
killer after cancer, obesity and heart disease. Today marks
the publication of the latest stage in this Government’s
determined efforts to reduce and reverse the effects of air
pollution on our health and on our natural environment. Our
clean air strategy consultation, published today, outlines
steps that we can all take to reduce the emission of harmful
gases and particulate matter from all the sources that
contribute to polluted air. It is important to recognise, as
I know my honourable friend does, that air pollution is
generated by a wide variety of sources: from the fuel used
for domestic heating to the application of fertilisers on
agricultural land; and from the use of chemicals in industry
to sea, rail, air and road transport. The strategy published
today outlines specific steps that we can take to reduce the
use of the most polluting fuels, to manage better the use of
manures and slurries on agricultural land and also to ensure
that non-road mobile machinery is also effectively policed,
among other measures.
Also, my honourable friend asks specifically about urban
transport pollution and of course last year the Government
published their UK plan for tackling roadside nitrogen
dioxide concentrations. The plan allocated over £3 billion to
help reduce harmful NOx emissions, including £475 million to
local authorities to enable them to develop their own air
quality plans. Since then we have been working with local
authorities to help them deliver specific solutions and have
issued ministerial directions to 61 local authorities to
ensure that they live up to their shared responsibilities.
Our plan, of course, committed us to phasing out the sale of
conventional diesel and petrol cars by 2040 and taking them
off the road altogether by 2050. This is more ambitious than
any EU requirement and puts Britain in the lead among major
developed economies.
Alongside that commitment, we are dedicating £1.5 billion to
the development of zero and ultra-low emission vehicles,
including support for new charging points across the country.
We were, of course, helped in the preparation of our clean
air strategy by the excellent report produced by the chairs
of the Health, Transport and Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs Committees, which was published earlier this year. In
their excellent report on air quality, the Joint Select
Committees recommended introducing a new clean air Act, and
we will introduce primary legislation to clean up our air.
They suggested that we initiate a new health campaign and we
will, as the Secretary of State for Health has emphasised,
introduce a personal messaging system to ensure that those
most at risk receive the information that they need about
pollution risks.
It was also recommended that we place health and environment
at the centre of our strategy, rather than simply technical
compliance, and we do that with ambitious new targets that
match World Health Organization metrics on improving air
quality. We were also asked to reduce emissions from tyres
and braking, the so-called Oslo effect, and today we
announced action to work with manufacturers to do just that.
Emissions have fallen consistently since 2010, and my
predecessors in this role are to be commended for the action
that they have taken. But today’s strategy marks the most
ambitious steps yet to accelerate our progress towards
cleaner air, and I commend it to the House”.
3.26 pm
-
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Statement. He will
know that the Question focused on transport emissions because
of their glaring omission from today’s published clean air
strategy. Defra’s own research makes it clear that the
quickest way to tackle nitrogen oxide pollution is to
introduce a network of clean air zones in urban areas. Can
the Minister explain why this Government are adamantly
refusing to take this action?
At the same time, there is an urgent need to phase out diesel
cars and vans. The Government’s current target is a very
unambitious 2040. Does the Minister accept that it is both
feasible and desirable to bring that date forward?
Finally, today’s clean air strategy has been produced in part
to satisfy the courts, which have demanded urgent action.
Does the noble Lord recognise the important role that courts
can play in defending environmental standards? Will his
Government now pledge to support our amendment, giving
greater powers, including recourse to court action, to the UK
green watchdog post Brexit?
-
My Lords, this is an extremely ambitious strategy. New
legislation will be introduced to give local government new
powers to take decisive action. We have deliberately said
that this is for local government because, with the funds
that we are providing of £3.5 billion, we want to work with
local government because we think that that is the place
where local decisions can be best made. That is why we need
to work in partnership—and we are intending to, because that
is how we will receive the greatest remedy.
The noble Baroness suggested that, in effect, the Government
were not proceeding with vigour. In fact, we are bringing
forward some of the most ambitious proposals for any
developed economy. Many of them exceed what other EU
countries are doing—and I think that that is very important
indeed.
On the point about the courts, clearly we are mindful of what
court proceedings have said. We were very pleased that the
court in the last case acknowledged the right course of
action. Where it did not agree was in saying that we should
have directed local authorities, which we have now done; we
will work with 61 local authorities where the most concern is
directed. That is precisely where we will solve a lot of
problems, particularly of nitrogen dioxide. Certainly, that
is what we intend to do.
-
(LD)
My Lords, the endless repetition of the mantra that this is
ambitious and that the Government are world leading does not
convince anyone. The truth of the matter is that 50% overall
of roadside pollution by nitrogen oxide, and 80% in dense
urban areas, is caused by transport, which is largely omitted
from today’s announcement.
Is the Minister aware that, in the last three months, sales
of petrol vehicles have soared to fill the gap left by diesel
ones, which people are deserting because they have become
aware of their emissions? Yet, by buying petrol vehicles,
they are now creating pollution from CO2, which has been the
subject of so much concern in the past. Do the Government
realise that what they are doing by their laissez-faire
approach is far too little, far too late? Producing a date of
2040 for ending the sale of petrol and diesel vehicles means
that the Government are dragging along in the wake of the
motor industry, which is working very much faster than that.
-
My Lords, I dispute what the noble Baroness has said. I have
figures here from when my party and hers were in government,
which include considerable reductions in air pollution since
2010. I wonder whether the noble Baroness wishes not to
acknowledge the reduction of, for instance, 27% in nitrogen
oxide from 2010 to 2016. So progress is being made, but we
want to make more. The noble Baroness shakes her head, but I
would have thought she would have been pleased about the
investment of £1.5 billion to position the UK at the global
forefront of all ultra-low emission vehicle development,
manufacture and use. We are doing all these things and we are
world leaders in this. Our investment in ultra-low emission
vehicles may not be recognised by some in your Lordships’
House but it is recognised by other countries. We are going
to ensure that, with increased electric charging, these
vehicles will replace conventional combustion engine ones.
-
(Con)
Does my noble friend agree that one of the causes of extra
emissions is traffic congestion? Am I the only Member of your
Lordships’ House who feels that there are an increasing
number of occasions when local authorities and others close
roads and are extremely slow to reopen them after the work
has been done? Can I direct him to come with me to Parliament
Street and Whitehall, where there is an absolutely classic
illustration of that problem? One drain has been repaired,
the south side of the carriageway is completely closed and
there is serious congestion in Horse Guards Avenue. I talked
to the people who were removing the barriers, in a rather
leisurely way, work having finished some time this morning,
and said: “When is this going to reopen?” They said,
“Midnight tonight”. There ought to be an arrangement when, if
the work finishes early, there is a messaging system and
roads can be reopened swiftly, so that the traffic can flow
and we can then end the congestion that otherwise occurs when
there are these blockages.
-
I entirely agree with my noble friend and will pick that up
with TfL and the Department for Transport. As my noble friend
rightly identified, congestion is a cause of pollution, as is
the idling of vehicles. I am pleased that the City of
Westminster has issued an edict about idling and turning
engines off. This is very helpful.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, 2040 to 2050 is still a long way away. I appreciate
that one has to develop infrastructure so that there are
charging points for electric vehicles. However, could we not
have made an immediate decision to encourage the use of
hybrid cars at the expense of petrol and diesel ones? Hybrid
cars have enormous advantages and this could be done very
quickly, without any charging points. Why not?
-
My Lords, there are many plus points in hybrid cars and I
entirely agree that, at this time, they are a very good
option. However, with our investment in ultra-low emission
vehicles and in more publicly accessible charging points, we
are clearly moving towards ensuring that ever more ultra-low
emission vehicles are bought.
-
(LD)
My Lords, the Minister has quoted our position worldwide.
However, the fact is that the end of last week the European
Commission infracted us for not meeting air quality
standards. So we are one of the six dirty half-dozen of
Europe for air quality. That is a fact—we would not be going
in front of the ECJ if we were not. Commissioner Vella put
that down in particular to those six member states being
persistent offenders that were in the last chance saloon. Can
the Minister say how we can make these strategies, and all
the other plans we have, credible, not just to Europe but to
our own citizens, to convince them that this time we will
perform where in the past we have singularly failed?
-
There were a number of points there. We are one of 22 member
states reporting exceedances, and there are 12 other
countries against which infraction proceedings are carrying
on. So this is undoubtedly a problem in many of the developed
economies, which is precisely why the £3.5 billion, plus what
we are announcing today on particulate matter and ammonia, is
all about bearing down on the problem of improving air
quality generally. We recognise that it is a great health
problem that has a great cost in misery and financially. We
wish to address this, and this is what we precisely need to
do.
-
(Con)
My Lords, I draw my noble friend’s attention to a scheme I
saw being demonstrated at the current Chelsea Flower Show.
Research has shown that some common house plants such as ivy
are brilliant at clearing pollution within a domestic
situation. This seems to be an interesting point that might
be followed up.
-
I entirely agree with my noble friend, whom I saw at Chelsea
very early yesterday morning. Plants and trees—the natural
world and its protection—are hugely important because of what
the natural world does for us. We still have a lot more to
learn, and there are many plants from which I hope we will
learn a great deal more about improving our environment.
|