Alan Andrews - Defra's Draft Action Plans
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•128 views
Client Earth's Alan Andrews on Defra's Draft Action Plans
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Alan Andrews - Defra's Draft Action Plans
Similar to Alan Andrews - Defra's Draft Action Plans (12)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Alan Andrews - Defra's Draft Action Plans
- 1. Institute of Air Quality Management AGM Alan Andrews Defra’s air quality plans 12 November 2015
- 2. The road to the Supreme Court December 2011: High Court May 2012: Court of Appeal March 2013: Supreme Court July 2014: Court of Justice of the European Union April 2015: Supreme Court
- 4. “The new Government, whatever its political complexion, should be left in no doubt as to the need for immediate action to address this issue.”
- 5. 1. Prepare new article 23 plans 2. 40-day public consultation 3. Final plans to Commission by 31/12/2015 4. Liberty to apply 5. Commission v Italy The Mandatory Order
- 6. 1. As short as possible 2. Timetable for implementation 3. Estimate of improvements 4. Checklist of measures Article 23 and Annex XV
- 8. “Investigate the feasibility of a national framework for low emission zones” (Defra, 2011)
- 9. £500,000*
- 10. Thank you Alan Andrews 020 7749 5976 aandrews@clientearth.org www.clientearth.org @ClientEarth
Editor's Notes
- All sounds depressingly familiar Clean air zones are the way forward, but: National framework Money Insurance p
- Full text: The plans propose only one new national measure (a national framework for clean air zones) and thereby unjustifiably exclude a number of other possible measures, despite the fact that (even on Defra’s own best case scenario) the draft plans will not achieve compliance until 2020 in 36 of 37 areas, and not until 2025 in London. There has, as previously, been a failure to take the correct ‘gap-bridging’ approach to compliance. The only new national measure proposed – the national framework for clean air zones – is proposed to be implemented by local authorities but is not mandatory, even for local authorities where exceedances of mandatory limit values will otherwise continue up to or beyond 2020, ten years after the original date for compliance set out in the Directive and 16 years after the limit values for NO2 were first set. Further, the (non-mandatory) clean air zones proposed envisage a timetable which is too leisurely and a range of restrictions which is unduly liberal in the light of the urgent Directive requirement, underlined by the Supreme Court in its most recent judgment, for compliance as swiftly as possible. The UK overview document wrongly seeks to rely upon local authorities (rather than national governments) implementing the Directive, despite the fact that there is no equivalent legally binding requirement on local authorities to do so (and despite the almost total absence of funding for the necessary measures). The plans consulted upon wrongly take 2020 as an acceptable target date for compliance and fail to apply the correct legal test of compliance in the shortest possible time. The plans consulted upon wrongly exclude from consideration developments since 2013 which have significantly worsened air quality and, thus, take the wrong ‘baseline’ for assessing whether any planned reductions in NO2 emissions will lead to compliance with the mandatory Directive limit values (and if so, when). The plans consulted upon do not give sufficient detail of the measures proposed or of the timetable for implementation or compliance, and therefore do not comply with §8 of Annex XV to the Directive. The plans consulted upon fail to have regard to the latest evidence on the ‘real world’ performance of diesel vehicles (including the Volkswagen scandal) and, therefore, wrongly predict compliance at an earlier date than is in fact feasible on the basis of the measures selected.