Agenda item

Motion submitted by Councillor Boden with regards to Air Quality Monitoring in Whittlesey.

Councillor Boden presented his motion regarding air quality monitoring in Whittlesey.

Members made comments as follows:

·       Councillor Mrs Laws asked members to support this motion as Councillor Boden is not exaggerating, Whittlesey members phones have been “red-hot” and there are residents who cannot open their windows, cannot open their doors and are fearful of the children playing in the garden by what is quite a throat gripping smell. She stated that members are concerned about the A605 HGVs, Saxon Pit and Forterra. Councillor Mrs Laws praised the Environmental Team but made the point that it is also in the hands of the Environment Agency and she feel this motion is imperative for the people and residents of Whittlesey.

·       Councillor Booth stated that he supports the aims of what is trying to be achieved with this motion but asked, as part of due diligence, if there is a ballpark figure of the capital revenue costs and would the Leader be willing to amend point b regarding online reporting and monitoring to say the whole of the District not just Whittlesey. He said from a quick online search there are around 25 locations in a report from 2020, with Broad Street March being an area where concerns had been raised previously so if it going to be undertaken in Whittlesey why is it not undertaken across the whole district.

·       Councillor Mrs French agreed with Councillor Booth, with March being on maximum and that is one of the reasons that a March Area Transport Strategy is going to be undertaken with the High Street improvements, with it not just being the traffic flow but to get the emissions out of Broad Street as the people that work and shop in Broad Street do not realise how bad it is.

·       Councillor Tierney made the point that when your residents are coming to you and repeatedly telling you something you have to listen and if so many different people are telling you the same thing there must be something to it. He stated that the information is not always right and you need to check the data so that you are transparent so in this case you are going to show residents that their fears are unfounded or you will find something so action can be taken to address it.

·       Councillor Patrick referred to the incinerator which is being proposed in Wisbech and he feels that Whittlesey will have other problems as he believes that the fly ash from that incinerator will be taken and transported to Whittlesey so, in his view, the whole district should be checked as there will be readings and if the incinerator is built the Council can see what pattern is developing and what sort of pollution there is.

·       Councillor Sutton stated that he has no overall problem with this motion, although he is not sure why it needed to come before Council. He feels there are lots of questions, is the fear greater than the reality and as Councillor Tierney has said the results will identify this one way or the other but his main concern it whether it is the Council’s responsibility to be funding this as there should be some monitoring at Saxon Pit through its licence so should the Council be utilising this rather than doing something it does not necessarily have the power to do. Councillor Sutton stated that he will not go against the motion as all members want their residents to be safe, but he just has concerns about the Council responsibility for doing something that either the private sector or the Environment Agency should be doing.

·       Councillor Connor made the point that he is the County Councillor for Whittlesey South and he gets many complaints from residents on the A605 and in all the surrounding areas so he feels members should listen to residents, they know their area best, and he will be supporting this motion, which he feels should be implemented sooner rather than later so residents have confidence.

·       Councillor Boden in summing up referred to Councillor Sutton’s question about why this motion needs to come before Council and the reason is that there are an increasing number of residents in Whittlesey who feel let down by the whole system, let down by a polluting enterprise that has been given planning permission to operate right on their doorstep, let down by the amount of pollution that is being experienced by people on a regular basis, let down by the fact that they have to clean the dust of their windows cills because it builds up and action has not been taken, with the first port of call for many of these if it is suspected that it comes from a regulated site is the Environment Agency and, in his view, the Environment Agency is less than perfect in the way in which it responds to the fears and concerns of residents, it does not work effectively as has been seen by the area’s MP getting involved with the Environment Agency and bringing in the relevant Secretary of State to see for himself just how badly things have gone wrong under the Environment Agency’s watch, which is why it is before Council so the residents know that they are not being let down by their representatives and the local Council. He stated the Council does have the power to do this and there is a responsibility in terms of the monitoring of air quality and to institute air quality action areas if it is appropriate and as Councillor Booth suggested this responsibility is not restricted to Whittlesey it is Fenland-wide and the Council already carries out a lot of that responsibility by the monitoring that is undertaken, but some is not suitable for real-time online reporting, such as the diffusion tubes.  Councillor Boden stated that he is happy to say, if this will satisfy Councillor Booth, that when this report comes back to Cabinet, as the priority at the moment is where the greatest problem is where people are telling us they are choking and not being able to breathe the air, that it is the start of a programme for the whole of the District so that the whole of Fenland is covered by the sort of online reporting which is being asked for as a matter of urgency in Whittlesey. He made the point that there will be more responsibility over the course of the next few years if Government is to be believed on what the Council needs to do and it might be required that a lot of additional equipment be purchased. Councillor Boden stated that he does not have a ballpark figure for the costs, the Council does have some PM2.5 monitors available but whether they are sufficiently accurate and reliable to provide the evidence that may be required is something that will be in the report that will be received in 6-7 weeks time. He advised that a ballpark figure for the modern machine itself is around £10,000 for a VM 10 PM2.5 machine, with this figure being off the top of his head, but ultimately what is the price to pay for clean air, being able to breathe and some members would be shocked by the stories that have been heard from residents in Whittlesey.

·       Councillor Booth indicated that he was satisfied with the comments made by Councillor Boden.

Proposed by Councillor Boden, seconded by Councillor Mrs Laws and AGREED to:

1.     support in principle the siting within Whittlesey of monitoring equipment measuring particulate matter, particularly PM2.5;

2.     that officers be required to present a report to the next scheduled meeting of Cabinet outlining:

a.     the capital and revenue costs and preferred location(s) for such additional monitoring equipment

b.    how Fenland District Council may facilitate online up-to-date public reporting of monitored air quality in Whittlesey (including, where possible, from third party monitoring equipment) recognising that whilst some monitoring data may be available real-time, other data (such as that from diffusion tubes) is necessarily only available historically.