Agenda item

This report and accompanying presentation provide an overview of the Council’s numerous workstreams aimed at improving air quality across the borough.

Adam Webber (Air Quality Strategy and Policy Lead) gave a presentation on Air Quality in Hammersmith & Fulham. He showed slides that highlighted the following key aspects:

• Air pollution in context including the health impacts of pollution.
• Pollution as an inequalities issue - Air pollution particularly affected the most vulnerable in society: children and older people, and those with pre-existing conditions. 
• Synergies with the wider climate emergency work - Climate change may make air pollution worse.
• Air Quality Action Plan 2025-30 - The council’s Air Quality Action Plan contains a range of actions that would be delivered by the council over the next five years.
• Principles and partnership objectives - Partnership objectives look to tackle the impacts of poor air quality within the borough through both behaviour change, and systems change.
• Workstreams and priorities - Building emissions, transport emissions, indoor air quality and behaviour change.

Councillor Amanda Lloyd-Harris thanked the team for their constructive presentation. She enquired about the enforcement of bylaws. Particularly regarding the burning of garden waste. Adam Webber acknowledged that enforcing such bylaws had been challenging. However. He noted that progress on the national governments White Paper on the Evolution Bill could make it easier for councils to introduce bylaws. Regarding enforcement, he explained that the Council already had teams in place to respond to and investigate smoke related complaints. He highlighted the importance of clear communication with residents, informing them of what was and isn’t permitted, and engaging them in discussion about wood more broadly.

Councillor Amanda Lloyd-Harris asked for clarification to be provided on the exact location of where the monitoring of the river walk was carried out. Adam Webber confirmed that this took place on the top corner of Frank Banfield Park. Additionally, it was noted that there were 6 different monitoring sites across the borough placed in strategic locations as pollution shifted.

Councillor Amanda Lloyd-Harris asked whether emissions from development sites were being monitored. In response Adam Webber noted that developments were taking place throughout the borough, often in areas close to communities from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. There were extensive regulations requiring developers to engage with local communities and provide updates in ongoing construction work to manage their sites in ways that minimised dust exposure. He also emphasised the importance of ensuring that the Council’s Air Quality Policy was being effectively implemented in practice.

The Chair requested further clarification regarding the heat maps for roads, specifically, whether they included construction areas and vehicle idling. She also asked if the data available could be presented in a more accessible format. Adam Webber responded that development often occurred near busier roads, which tend to be more polluted areas. He acknowledged that concerns had been raised about vehicle idling but suggested that while it was largely unnecessary, it contributed minimally to the Council’s overall emissions. Nevertheless, further community work was needed on this issue.

Adam Webber also noted that although the data was publicly available through open sources it was not always easy to interpret. The Council in partnership with Imperial, was working on developing a more user-friendly platform to improve public access to the various types of data available.

With regards to behaviour change the Chair asked how the Council planned to engage with residents to encourage more environmentally responsible actions, specifically around issues such as engine idling and burning of waste. She was particularly interested in how the Council intended to communicate these messages in a way that would effectively nudge behaviour change and raise awareness about air pollution. Adam Webber noted that significant work was underway around behaviour change. The current focus was on understanding residents’ motivations and whether these could be segmented into different cohorts. He emphasised the importance of keeping messaging simple and easy to understand, helping residents recognise the impact of their actions and identifying a reason to change their behaviour. A behaviour change specialist was appointed last year and conducted several focus groups. Additional focus groups were planned for this summer to further explore the factors that influenced and motivated residents, with the aim to integrating these insights into the Council’s approach.

A resident raised a query regarding whether the layout of the Committee could be improved to make it more inclusive for residents. The Chair acknowledged the suggestion and noted that she would explore ways with the relevant department and AV support to explore options of such an arrangement.

Action: Amrita White

The same resident raised concerns that there was currently no transport or Active Travel Strategy in place specifically addressing air pollution and asked when the Council intended to implement such strategies. Councillor Wesley Harcourt (Cabinet Member for Climate Change and Ecology), noted that as heard at the previous meeting, the Committee had issued a draft Net Zero Transport Policy, which was still in development and not yet ready for publication. He acknowledged the importance of the issue raised. Hinesh Mehta (Assistant Director Climate Change) added that Officers were actively working on the Net Zero Transport Policy, but there was currently no set timeline for its publication. He also noted that the Council was currently working in alignment with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, which had been in place for several years.

The resident asked a follow up question. He noted that the borough currently only had four School Streets and asked how implementation could be accelerated as well as what steps the Council was taking to the speed the roll out of Clean Air Neighbourhoods. Adam Webber acknowledged the low number and explained that the Council had assessed feasibility across all primary schools. Demand had been lower than anticipated. The Council planned to re-engage with communities where School Streets existed to assess any shift in perception. It would also continue working with schools and local communities to raise awareness and promote further uptake.

John Galsworthy (Director of Climate Change and Transport) noted that consultations were underway in areas with community support for neighbourhood improvements, including Olympia and Brook Green, and additional interest expressed from Barons Court.

The resident asked what actions were being taken to reduce wood burning using the powers available to the Council. Adam Webber noted that the Council did have enforcement powers and guidance was also available on approved fuels and appliances. He added that the Council was part of a borough wide consortium, aimed at raising public awareness around the impacts of wood burning. In terms of the enforcement figures, Adam Webber noted that he would need to follow up with that information.

Action: Adam Webber

A resident asked what kinds of incentives the Council planned to introduce to encourage more sustainable habits among residents, commuters and visitors. Adam Webber highlighted that the main incentive for encouraging sustainable behaviour would be linking actions to clear, tangible health benefits. Many people were still unaware of the direct impact of pollution had on their own health and that of their families. Therefore, the focus of any behaviour change efforts would be to communicate strong health-based messages showing not just what actions people could take, but why these actions mattered. Particularly in terms of improving everyday wellbeing and long-term health outcomes.

Prof Frank Kelly (Imperial College London) gave a presentation on measuring, modelling and analysing the health impacts of poor air quality. He highlighted that this was a critical issue that must be addressed accurately to ensure effective action took place. His presentation included key focus areas such as the Breathe London project, microenvironmental exposures, traffics polices, the health impacts of indoor air quality, and emerging concerns around microplastics and their effects on human health. It was noted that air quality should be considered in the home and workplace and embedded into Care Plans. He also highlighted the importance of increasing public awareness around this area.

Prof Frank Kelly (Imperial College London) provided an overview of the early findings from the healthy homes study which suggested that cooking appliances and cooking in general were indoor air pollutants that not only affected the kitchen but went through to the bedrooms.  It was noted that induction hobs were far less polluting than gas hobs. 

Councillor Amanda Lloyd-Harris requested a copy of the presentation to be circulated to Committee Members.

Action: Adam Webber

Dr Gareth Thompson (Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust) provided a verbal update, highlighting the following key aspects:

• That a key part of his role was to deliver more environmentally friendly healthcare, both within hospitals and in partnership with local communities.
• Commended the Council for its ongoing efforts and ambitious plans to address issues relating to climate change.
• The negative effects of air pollution on health and various organs. Tackling climate change and improving air quality brought immediate health benefits, not just long-term environmental ones.
• The importance of collaboration. Paediatricians, public health doctors and emergency clinicians had been actively involved in air quality workshops, ensuring expert voices were included
• Hospitals had committed to support the ‘Better Air, Better Health’ collaboration and would continue to contribute to future air quality projects.

The Chair asked whether there was any data showing that banning indoor smoking over many years had a significant impact on health. Dr Gareth Thompson responded that while he did not have the specific data to hand, it suggested that such bans lead to a reduction in exposure to second-hand smoke. He noted that this reduction had a measurable positive effect on health, particularly among non-smokers.

In response to a question asked by Councillor Callum Nimmo, Dr Gareth Thompson noted that air pollution didn’t apply to boundaries. He noted that whilst he didn’t have the data to hand. health impacts within the borough were likely to be similar to most other regions of London and were broadly comparable. As you went further out of London pollution tends to decrease.

Claire McDonald (Mums for Lungs) gave a presentation on the objectives of Mums for Lungs. It was noted that the reason for setting up Mums for Lungs was to raise awareness on how to protect yourself and your family and reduce your contribution to air pollution. She talked about the policies and schemes that were likely to have the most impact on reducing air pollution at source. One example was School Streets. These were roads closed to motor traffic at drop-off and pick up times, in term time only. The scheme reduced traffic, and therefore pollution. (25% of rush hour traffic in London comes from the school run). It created a safer environment for everyone near and outside a school, & encouraged active travel, which improved health and learning outcomes for children. In addition, there were over 800 Schools’ Streets in London and Lambeth would have over 90% of primary schools covered by November 2025.

The Chair highlighted the importance of behaviour change, particularly in addressing how to discourage, the small number of individuals who drove to the school and park directly outside, which negatively affected all children. Claire McDonald added that, in the context of behaviour change, School Streets offered an effective environment for encouraging new habits. She noted that there was a general understanding among the pubic that protecting children’s health and ensuring safety were priorities, and that limiting car use around schools would have a positive impact on children’s wellbeing.

Councillor Callum Nimmo asked how Mums for Lungs approached balancing interest of parents, who were generally supportive of school initiatives, with those of residents who were opposed to increased restrictions in the area. Claire McDonald responded that, in her experience, residents were generally supportive and complaints from angry residents were rare. She also noted that, to her knowledge, Hammersmith and Fulham had a high proportion of non-catchment schools, which likely contributed to higher levels of car use. If schools were not engaging with this initiative, it was likely due to this challenge.

A resident noted that there was broad agreement on the importance of improving public access to air quality information, highlighting that current awareness levels were low. He asked how greater awareness of poor air quality could be achieved. In response Adam Webber responded that, in relation to pollution alerts for schools, these were sent out with Imperial College involved as part of a Greater London Authority, commissioned project to support this work. He added that one idea being explored (as suggested by the Chair) was the use of visual cues, such as smiley and sad faces at schools, to discourage driving and to raise awareness of pollution levels.

A resident raised a point regarding School Streets, noting that there were approximately 800 School Streets across London. However, he pointed out that the borough had a comparatively low number and emphasised the importance of increasing support for this initiative locally.

Councillor Amanda Lloyd-Harris noted the need to explore the reasons behind barriers to implementing School Streets, highlighting factors such as the borough’s small size and high levels of congestions. She emphasised that these challenges would have an impact on implementation, and that any messaging to residents should clearly communicate what alternative options were available to them.

The Chair thanked all the presenters for their contributions and concluded the meeting by summarising the key outcomes. She highlighted that behaviour change was a crucial area for further exploration, particularly in relation to how messages about air quality were communicated to residents. She also emphasised the importance of collaborative working and improving the school run, including the potential for implementing more School Streets across the borough.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee noted the report.