Air Pollution (Hansard, 3 October 2000)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty)
My Lords, the World Health Organisation's report of 1999 assessed the number of premature deaths from traffic-related air pollution in France, Austria and Switzerland. The methodology used was very similar to that used by our own Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollution. That committee concluded in 1998 that air pollution in the UK was responsible for the premature deaths of between 12,000 and 24,000 vulnerable people each year. The Government took account of the committee's conclusions in setting health based air quality objectives in their air quality strategy published earlier this year.

Lord Berkeley
My Lords, I am very grateful to my noble friend for that very full Answer. Is he aware, from this report, that half of the pollution and fatalities were caused by microparticulates which come mainly from vehicle exhausts, particularly diesel? What action will be taken to ensure that the cost of NHS treatment of all those people he mentioned is attributed to the polluter? Does that not mean that road transport costs are too low at the moment rather than too high?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, through the way in which we calculate VED on heavy lorries and cars., there is already an attempt to reflect the cost of general pollution, which includes the health impact and CO₂ emissions. Recent reports have indicated that the total cost of a combination of fuel duty and VED costs is broadly proportionate to the environmental damage, including the damage to the actual track which is produced by those vehicles. So that is one principle which informs the Government's view on taxation of vehicles. There are other considerations which include competitiveness and the movement of world fuel prices.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, will the Minister tell us what effect the Human Rights Act will have on that issue as we read that the tobacco companies may have the right to continue advertising? That may increase the consumption of tobacco, which is definitely an air pollutant, particularly for people in the immediate vicinity of someone who is smoking.

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, I am not entirely sure that the Human Rights Act alters the position in relation to 1267 the subject of the Question; namely, pollution due to traffic. Clearly, in relation to the tobacco companies, there are rights for those people who suffer from tobacco-induced illnesses which were perpetrated by the tobacco companies at a time when they were already aware of the medical consequences of their products. But I am not sure that there is a read-across into fuel duty.

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, as far as I can see, there is no mention of traffic at all in the Question.

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, the Question refers to the WHO's report, which relates to traffic. As my noble friend Lord Berkeley made clear in his supplementary question, he was concerned about the impact of traffic. The figures quoted both in the WHO report and in our own committee's report relate to traffic-induced pollution effects.

§ The Lord Bishop of Hereford
My Lords, will the Minister tell us what plans the Government have to share more effectively with the public at large the alarming information in those reports in order to educate them about this matter and to dissuade them from unnecessary use of cars? Will the Minister tell us also why, during the recent fuel crisis, no reference was made at all to the dire environmental consequences of ever-increasing volumes of road traffic?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, the original report gained some publicity. Indeed, an article in the Guardian provoked my noble friend Lord Berkeley to table this Question. So the information is there.
As regards the Government's own research, we published a report on the environmental cost of road traffic in July. There are some contentious issues involved in that research but, broadly speaking, it indicates what I said in my second answer.
On the recent fuel dispute, I thought it was clear from the answers given by my noble friend Lord Macdonald of Tradeston that we regard the level of fuel duty as having an effect on traffic. Indeed, it is certainly the case that relatively high fuel prices have been one of the contributors to the much lower growth of traffic as compared with economic growth than was the situation a few years ago. It is not the only component of that change, as my noble friend made clear. Of course, there are other considerations to be taken into account, as I have said.

§ Lord Rotherwick
My Lords, will the Minister say what research has been done by the Government into electric-powered vehicles—especially electric-powered buses, because buses are one of the worst polluters—gas-powered cars and particularly hydrogen-cell technologies for improving pollution technology? It is extremely ineffective merely to increase the price of petrol to reduce pollution. A better way forward is to produce the technology which will lower the pollution 1268 produced by cars so that those people who really need to use their cars, especially in rural areas, can go about their business in a better way.

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, as we made clear in our 10-year transport plan, which my noble friend Lord Macdonald explained to the House in July, part of our strategy must be to speed up the change to alternative fuel technology based vehicles, both in terms of public service vehicles, such as buses and taxis, and in terms of transport more generally. The process will be relatively slow but it can be speeded up. There is already fiscal encouragement to take up gas-fuelled and electric cars which are appropriate in certain niche markets. We are encouraging that. The Government are also running, through the Energy Savings Trust, the Powership Programme to encourage the switch to alternative fuel vehicles. The DTI is funding the Foresight Programme which is encouraging R&D in alternative fuels. I have recently met representatives from both the oil companies and the motor manufacturing companies to try to encourage a more co-ordinated approach to the development of alternative fuels.
As regards hydrogen cells, that is a new technology which is not that far over the horizon. It will be some years before it becomes commercially valid but it is one of the technologies that we should wish to encourage.