Issue - meetings

DEFRA’s response to UDC’s Air Quality Annual Status report  highlights that, “after distance correction, there are now no exceedances of the annual mean objective for Nitrogen Dioxide within the Saffron Walden AQMA, or any results within 10% of objective levels at positions of relevant exposure” and goes on to state that “The recent monitoring results are extremely encouraging, and the Council should maintain the strategy outlined within the Action Plan”.

This council welcomes this response and will continue its work to improve further the air quality in our District.

Councillor Ranger explained the meaning of his proposal, which was as follows: 

DEFRA’s response to UDC’s Air Quality Annual Status report  highlights that, “after distance correction, there are now no exceedances of the annual mean objective for Nitrogen Dioxide within the Saffron Walden AQMA, or any results within 10% of objective levels at positions of relevant exposure” and goes on to state that “The recent monitoring results are extremely encouraging, and the Council should maintain the strategy outlined within the Action Plan”. This council welcomes this response and will continue its work to improve further the air quality in our District.

Councillor Ranger said the report showed the Council was doing well, but that the Council was not complacent.  Monitoring would continue, and the Council would upgrade the analyser at London Road to a permanent situation, and would upgrade Hill Street.  At Hill Street the real-time analyser would not be replaced, but additional equipment would be deployed instead.  Councillor Ranger said he was aware of Councillor Hargreaves’ amendment, and invited him to consider withdrawing that amendment in light of the update he had given. 

Councillor Rolfe seconded the motion.

Councillor Hargreaves said his amendment was to add wording at the end of the last sentence of the motion, as follows:  “and urges the Cabinet to reinstate the council's failed monitoring equipment in order to return the air quality reporting to the more accurate local validation preferred by DEFRA.”

Councillor Hargreaves said it appeared Councillor Ranger was agreeing with his amendment, which should stand.

Officers confirmed the amendment had been uploaded to the meetings page of the website, and circulated to all members by email by the required deadline, and that printed copies were available. 

Councillor Fairhurst seconded the amendment. 

Councillor Ranger said the difficulty with the amendment was the requirement to reinstate failed equipment, and explained in detail the equipment which would in fact be used, which would satisfy the need to include local bias. 

Councillor Gerard said he did not understand why the amendment was not welcomed, as Councillor Ranger had explained the intention. 

Councillor Ranger said he would agree to alter the motion by removal of the reference to “reinstatement”, and read out the proposed motion as altered, which would omit the words “reinstate the council’s failed monitoring equipment in order to”. 

Councillor Dean said it was problematic that the matter had come to a meeting of the Council when there was a high level of technical detail.  There was no governance structure for this type of report.  Scrutiny Committee had seen the report but at not looked at the annual report which was published in July.  This was the wrong sort of motion to bring to Council and he would abstain. 

The Chairman reminded Members they were debating the substantive motion. 

Councillor R Freeman said it was important to get the right equipment to tackle air quality monitoring, and to ensure it worked. 

Councillor Lees said planning was an important part of air quality.  Poor air quality  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20