CAMPAIGNERS have called for illegal air pollution in Glasgow and other UK cities to be tackled as they took their case to the UK's highest court.
Ben Jaffey, representing environmental campaign group ClientEarth, urged a panel of five Supreme Court judges in London to order the UK Government to produce a new plan for reducing harmful levels of nitrogen dioxide within three months.
In cities including Glasgow, levels of the pollutant are nearly twice EU limits.
Air pollution has been linked to coronary artery disease, heart attacks and strokes, and has been blamed for causing more than 300 deaths per year in the city.
ClientEarth says it is responsible for 29,000 deaths a year across the UK - more than alcohol and obesity combined.
The most common source of nitrogen dioxide in urban areas is vehicle emissions, especially from diesel engines.
Mr Jaffey said only enforcement by the Supreme Court would provide "an effective remedy" for the ongoing failure of the UK Government to meet the target on pollutants.
There should be a legally-binding and "mandatory order requiring the urgent production of a new and lawful air quality plan", the barrister argued.
He added: "Poor air quality is a major public health problem in the UK. The most serious breach of air quality standards in the UK is nitrogen dioxide pollution.
"The main atmospheric source of nitrogen dioxide is road traffic, particularly from diesel vehicles. Exposure to nitrogen dioxide pollution causes early deaths, hospital admissions and ill-health, particularly from respiratory illness."
Average levels of nitrogen dioxide this year in the Glasgow Urban Area will be 74 micrograms per cubic metre at the most polluted spots. The EU legal limit is 40 micrograms.
A recent study by Friends of the Earth named Hope Street in Glasgow as Scotland's most polluted street.
Jenny Bates, air pollution campaigner for FoE, said: "UK air pollution kills tens of thousands of people prematurely each year in the UK, and puts extra strain on our beleaguered NHS.
"The Government should be forced to come up with an urgent action plan to stop people choking on dirty air and end this national disgrace.
"It's time to tackle the main cause of this pollution, which is too much dirty traffic, by encouraging cleaner vehicles and getting more people on to bikes, buses, trains."
A ruling from the London-based court is likely to take anything from one to three months to deliver.
The Supreme Court hearing yesterday (thur) follows last year's ruling from the European Court of Justice which held that the UK must have a plan to achieve air quality standards in the "shortest time possible".
Alan Andrews, ClientEarth lawyer, said: "Scientists estimate that every year at least 29,000 people die early in the UK as a result of air pollution. [On Thursday], we asked the Court to step in and force the Government to finally get to grips with this national health crisis.
"The Supreme Court heard that Government plans won't achieve compliance with legal limits until after 2030. How soon after 2030, isn't clear. We are hopeful that after our five-year legal fight, the judges will uphold the right to breathe clean air.
"Every year of dither and delay by Government just means thousands more people will die or be made seriously ill from heart attacks, asthma attacks, strokes and cancer. It's unacceptable and we need action now."
Kassie Smith QC, representing the Secretary of State for the Environment, urged the court to "exercise its discretion" and reject campaigners' application for a mandatory order.
She added that revised air quality plans were already being produced.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article