Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Jarelle FRANCIS, Green Party Candidate in Harringay by-election, answering questions about air pollution
Jarelle FRANCIS gives a clear message: pollution around Harringay ward - and in Haringey generally - is far too high and action to reduce it must be taken urgently.
Green Party activists measured levels of NO2 pollution in the borough in January and out of 40 readings, 40 were above the EU legal limit. All three readings around Harringay ward were alarmingly high.
We will be putting up tubes again in the next few days - in Harringay ward to measure the impact of Wightman Road closure on Wightman Road, on the ladder and on Green Lanes.
Tags for Forum Posts: Green Lanes, Harringay by-election, Jarelle FRANCIS, NO2 levels, Wightman Road, pollution
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Dan on
-
Great that the problem is recognised. Again. But again - no solution offered.
Look - we know what needs to be done. Driving petrol/diesel needs to be made more difficult and more expensive. Less polluting forms of transport need to be incentivised - heavily. And of course, people who make awful vehicle choices should be made to pay towards the costs. Golly we can do it with fags and booze (well sort of in this case)
It is clear that there is a false economy at play here. The enormous costs of pollution are being borne at the expense of people who get a bit grumpy. How grumpy would you get when you see blood in your cough, or your 6 year-old being told they cant play sport because their lungs haven't developed properly? Or perhaps spending time in hospital regularly to deal with 'inconveniences' caused by dirty air.
In short and in economic terms - the price of fuel is a market failure. But Haringey cant sort that. That's the big stuff. But why should our kids and community bear the cost of someone else's non-essential car choice? Yes of course there are those who need to drive. But need is a strong word. Very over-used. Much like the word 'sustainable'. Sure it might be more difficult, but 'need'? I am not talking about those who do actually 'need' here. There are of course exceptions.
So what can be done locally? Well for all parties I see a complete avoidance of grabbing the bull by the horns for the sake of upsetting a few voters. Of course we all know the problem. It's old news. But the real question is how important is the problem? And what are we going to do about it? More important than effecting 4x4 drivers who drive their kids to school? More important than causing 1/2 extra drive for someone who drives less than 3 miles to work (and doesn't need a car)?
Here are some solutions:
1. Friction costs can go up (i.e. closure of wightman, which has increased friction costs for many drivers - often I'd imagine this has led some people to walk instead of take the car for local journeys). This is great. Keep it going. I get that cars will need to go somewhere, and of course there will be winners and losers, but we can experiment and trial new ideas (and there are so many innovation out there). When you can control traffic better you can manage it better.
Make driving more difficult. Sorry for people who are affected (who I hope are trying to be part of a solution also), but I remind - please check on the harm here. It's huge. We are not talking smoking fags in pubs. Much bigger. Yes we know that people have to get the kids to school, etc etc. but pollution is a huge cost and problem.
2. Increase parking charges significantly for high-polluting vehicles (and hey maybe even re-invest in better and cleaner transport). Granted not all SUVs are proportionally 'high-polluting', but the vast majority are. We don't 'need' such vehicles here. They should be pulling horse boxes in hampshire or something. We can quite easily work out the costs of pollution, scale this onto parking charges for such vehicles.
3. Measure and communicate properly. So understand behaviour properly (not surveys!) and make sure that communities have access to pollution data (and more of it). Making issues salient is one great way to encourage change. This is easy to do. Let's see the Kings data - make it more accessible. Let's get more. let's be able to choose which streets are best to walk the kids to school. Data allows us to do this.
4. Incentivise low polluting vehicles. Free parking in centres for BEVs, use of bus lanes and free fuel. Make it easy. Give more. Give business rate discounts for companies that invest in EVs.
Come on - I am getting bored with talking about the problem. Let's have some solutions.
So so many people want to do the right thing. But for time, money or convenience they just can't quite make the jump. Because Haringey is a driver's borough (granted the roads are a bit clogged now, but it's we're not talking 10 cars an hour). It's cheap to pollute here. It's expensive to be cleaner.
Make it being cleaner easier. And easier, and easier. And for those who don't give a shit about air pollution - cash in. The council needs money and here's a great cause. We just need councillors with purpose for this cause.
-
-
Thanks Martina. My point is I don't see councillors pursuing them locally (this includes green). I don't see anyone giving me - as a voter who cares - solutions. Or even examples of solutions. I don;t have time to read reams of party politics. This video was your shot at me. And there was not much in it. Sorry.
Sorry but I won't be getting involved with the consultation. They can pick or choose what suits the wind/agenda at the time insofar as comments are concerned. 'Thanks for your comments'...I am too busy (I am fortunate my work involves helping with just this kind of problem).
Yes there are solutions that require international discussions, those that are national, those that are regional (city hall). I am talking local. Yes we need city hall for some things, but not everything. I want to know what will be done in haringey about this very issue. Not might, not could but will.
I love what the greens are doing. Increasing monitoring is superb, and I hope this data is made more salient.
I want evidence-based solutions. We have the evidence. But no solutions. A strong campaign requires strong messages on exactly and specifically what will be done.
-
Permalink Reply by matthew cuthbert on
-
I think I have been an exception to your statement, in 2008 architects, agronomical engineers, (landscape architects,) and urban designers were first to get the chop, having just graduated studying Urban Design, I decided to focus on local politics in 2010, thank you for bringing me back on piste, (discussing the urban realm.)
I would advocate courses for councilors to attend to better understand the built environment, together with other disciplines, in the hope to bring modem thought, and evolving policy to the forefront of council decisions.
2016 is Jarelle's time, continue to bring your knowledge to the table, and the Green Party can continue to address you concerns.
-
-
We can form opposition, but action can be taken more directly if we are elected, vote green, there are already two Labour candidates, let's bring Green attitudes to the chamber. Islington & Camden have followed, were lagging behind, let's catch up.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
I love this post. I think electric motor vehicles will save us for what it's worth but sad to see that it's a bit late for the current crop of children.
-
-
Thanks John, a great boost. I agree with you. Once the range/storage problem is over, then we have a level playing field. It's then down to governments to move quickly on infrastructure, policy and/or market-based incentives/levies. I shudder to think what they won't do.
Loss aversion ("I can't lose my life driving this car") and discounting the future are two of our worst psychological biases for the big stuff.
-
-
I have a big question about autonomous vehicles that was posed to me by Paul from O'Donovan's when he showed me their new lorry in Finsbury Park a few weeks ago: "If vehicles are autonomous, how will you stop abuse?". By abuse he means pedestrians walking out in front of it just for fun, knowing that it will stop. So my current answers are that autonomous vehicles will have to drive upon roads which people are banned from being on, or they will have to learn to mimic human drivers and "smidsy" sometimes, which is a bit chilling.
-
-
I don't understand how a pedestrian will know a vehicle is autonomous before stepping out? So does autonomy mean complete autonomy?
So I think we need to really understand whether such 'abuse' is real or theoretical first. I don't agree with Paul's conclusion here - that being that abuse occurs because vehicles are known to be autonomously driven. I appreciate it requires thought for the industry, but I wouldn't go as far to say it even is real just yet.
-
-
Insurance premiums will quickly sky-rocket for human drivers forcing them to hand control over to their vehicles. They'll all be autonomous.
-
-
Yes, and we won't site Blade Runner, as an example of 'future projecting' the Autonomous Taxi...from obscurity to influence, a model down the road.
-
-
Hamden Road, and the Hawes and Curtis sites together with Paul Simon's Developments, should be opportunities for Haringey Council to promote electric car charging points, if this doesn't materialise this will be seen, and identified as a failure.
Heartlands is a missed opportunity, with even greater car yeilds than any other development I have seen since Wiltshire, Surrey Gardens and Finsbury Park Avenue in the 80's, only compounding traffic congestion.
Car ownership will move toward car clubs and emission standards, it will be like a nationalised ownership sector providing cutting edge transport.
Technology should be open between providers to promote advancement and cooperation, to realise the aspiration for a true people's car, aiming for sustainable independent medium range transport provision.
-
-
Thanks Matthew. My point is not 'who cares the most about the environment?' or indeed 'who wants to do most?'.
My point is I don't see ideas in delivering specific solutions. Are we going to rely on people caring about the environment? Because if we do, forget it.
I see re-framing of the same problems and political aspirations. But not defined solutions. Whether they happen or not. Why is no body talking about levying heavy charges on polluting vehicles? Surely this would be fund-raiser number one?
And this applies to all parties. this is dreamworld stuff. What on earth is a 'true people's car?' Is that the solution to air quality in Haringey? And car clubs? this is not working and unless big changes are made to incentives, it will remain a scratch on the surface of the problem. putting tonnes of effort into 5-20 charging points wont get far. It should be mandatory.
If we are to make significant differences to air quality in Haringey (and elsewhere for that matter) two things have to occur:
1) Doing bad things has to become more costly. More costly and more costly
2) Doing good things has to become easier/less costly. And easier and easier.
For air quality, we know what the bad is and where the bad is. And we know the same for good.
We have the solutions now. And we know that pollution costs. How this will be done remains an unknown.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
