Examination of Witnesses (Questions 3600
- 3619)
3600. I am going to be dealing with generalities
covering consultation, the Community Liaison Panel and the impact
of the proposed construction site on the health of local people.
At the end, I will be asking for some advice because I have heard
the earlier discussions regarding what is a policy, what is an
assurance and what is an undertaking, and I have ended up probably
sort of not fully understanding, but you can understand the confusion
for laypeople between the two, and my concern of course is that
policies, I understand, are non-statutory. However, I will be
seeking some advice from you at the end.
3601. We have heard from Dr Safir and I just
really wanted to come back again on the question of this Health
Impact Assessment which was produced by Crossrail in January 2006.
We received it in June 2006 and it is a 40-page document covering
the entire route. We were assured in the House of Commons that
it was a work-in-progress and that more work would be done on
specific areas of the issues that we raised in the House of Commons
with regard to this rather bland document. To my knowledge, and
you heard from Dr Safir, virtually nothing, as far as we are aware,
has been done with regards to this being a work-in-progress document.
Now, we believe that the document is totally inadequate and it
does recognise that Tower Hamlets will be one of the boroughs
worst affected by the Crossrail construction from air pollution,
dust, noise, increased stress levels, accidents, et cetera, but
nowhere does it offer any specific solutions for mitigating these
impacts, nor does it offer any benefits that might help to offset
these detrimental impacts.
3602. In supporting evidence that we have received
from Crossrail, it says that the Crossrail Health Impact Assessment
is focused on the changes to the key determinants of health that
are predicted to occur as a result of the project. It is not concerned
with the effects that would occur anyway without Crossrail, but
it does consider possible cumulative impacts resulting from implementing
the project in an environment that is already affecting the health
of the defined population significantly. There is no evidence,
as far as I can see, to demonstrate that Crossrail have considered
any cumulative effects on the health of Spitalfields residents.
3603. Further on, the document says that these
impacts on the key determinants of health may then lead to a changed
health outcome, such as an increase, or a decrease, in the risk
of disease or accident. Perhaps most significantly, the actual
Health Impact Assessment itself says that "life expectancy
between the London boroughs exhibits similar trends with Tower
Hamlets having the lowest life expectancy and the fourth lowest
in England. Life expectancy is the general indication of health,
and lower life expectancies are associated with poorer levels
of health". Again, Dr Safir has described that in quite vivid
detail yesterday, I think. We know that increased noise, dust,
air pollution, stress levels, road traffic and other features
associated with major construction sites have a more detrimental
impact on people suffering chronic ill-health leading to increases
in stress and a worsening in both their physical and their mental
health. Despite that, the Health Impact Assessment says throughout,
without any supporting evidence being included in the actual document,
that everything is going to be fine in Spitalfields. Now, I have
heard in fact that, if we want to find out how they have done
this assessment, we have to cross-reference all of this with the
Environmental Impact Assessment which is a very complicated and
very lengthy document which, as a layperson, I neither have the
technical ability to address those issues nor the wherewithal
to sift for days on end trying to find that evidence, and I would
have hoped that it should have been included in the Health Impact
Assessment. However, they do not in that document actually provide
any detailed environmental statement for such evidence, and any
increase in noise, dust, air pollution and all other factors impacting
on health arising from the Hanbury Street construction site in
the middle of a densely populated area, they say, "will have
no significantly detrimental effect on Spitalfields residents".
3604. A specific area of serious concern to
us is the increase in air pollution. We again have heard from
Dr Safir about the seriously high level of patients in his practice
suffering from potentially fatal chest ailments of all types and
of children with eczema and asthma, much of which is suspected
to be the result of very high levels of air pollution. Neither
Dr Safir nor I are experts on pollution, but I have been advised
by a former GP in fact, who is not Dr Safir, that Tower Hamlets
has one of the worst air pollution rates in inner London. A committee
on the medical effects of air pollution says, "The effects
of air pollution in the UK show that deaths occur earlier and
that hospital admissions for respiratory diseases are probably
both caused by exposure to air pollution". The same committee
goes on to say, "The results of preliminary work on exposure
to air pollution is certainly consistent with current levels of
air pollution having a significant effect on life expectancy".
Now, this is a pretty sobering message for us as local residents
and for all the doctors in the Spitalfields practice as it is
acknowledged in the Health Impact Assessment that in Spitalfields
we will be one of the neighbourhoods worst affected by this increased
pollution from the Hanbury Street construction site and the increase
in lorry movements in narrow, congested and heavily used streets.
3605. Crossrail's Health Impact Assessment suggests
that increased air pollution will be limited to a very small area
immediately adjacent to the construction site, but that assessment
provides again absolutely no evidence to support that claim, and
I have already said that, in order to find out the evidence to
support that claim, I would have to sift through the Environmental
Impact Assessment for such details.
3606. However, the document does say that ambient
air pollution concentrations will increase along the lorry routes,
but they justify that by claiming that it will increase by only
10 per cent, but that any direct impact on health of those living
along the routes is likely to be so small as to be "beyond
meaningful quantification". This can only be described as
a vacuous claim as no data is provided to support this statement,
and you have seen for yourselves on your walkabout the narrowness
of our streets and how close the blocks of flats are to the roadway.
The HIA gives no acknowledgement to the published fact as well
that is well-known within the medical profession that certain
particles from traffic exhaust, which are called PM10s, will inevitably
be a major component of the increased pollution along the lorry
routes in Spitalfields. More importantly, these PM10s are easily
able to travel long distances and enter homes through windows
even when they are closed or double-glazed.
3607. We are also very concerned about lorries
waiting in the area for the proposed 30-minute stoppages at the
moment. Chances are that, if they are going to be only there for,
say, ten minutes, they are going to keep their engines running
rather than turn them off.
3608. CHAIRMAN: I asked about this and
there apparently are holding areas.
3609. MS COVE: I heard about that yesterday.
The holding area is in Burdett Road, if I remember rightly. Burdett
Road is a good half a mile away so I cannot see that lorries will
come into Spitalfields, come into Hanbury Street, get loaded up
with their load and then go back to Burdett Road to wait for half
an hour and then come back and go through our route. That would
not make sense.
3610. CHAIRMAN: It may be a contractual
requirement.
3611. MS COVE: Once they have gone back
to Burdett Road with their load they have got to get out of Spitalfields
to get back to Burdett Road. If they cannot go between, say, 9.00
and 9.30 in the morning they cannot go back the route they came
in on because parts of them are one-way streets; and, secondly,
once they are at Burdett Road they might just as well go away
altogether with their load on and not come back to Spitalfields.
We are not wonderfully impressed with the idea of the holding
area. Once the lorries have left Burdett Road and they get to
Hanbury Street and get loaded up they may have to wait 20 minutes
or so between 9.00 and 9.30 in the morning before they can go
off out of the route; and the holding is like a parking space
overnight, or maybe at lunchtime. I was going to ask about that
because it did not make sense to me to have it in the holding
area. We believe they are going to be idling around and they will
have their engines running in Spitalfields because we know from
past experience of major construction sites that lorry drivers,
because they are very often subcontractors of subcontractors of
subcontractors and they are self-employed, a) they are in a hurry
to get their job done and b) they want to get going and want to
move fast once they do get going and they are not liking the idea
of hanging around for half an hour one way or the other.
3612. We are very concerned about the potential
increase in air pollution and the seriously detrimental impact
we think it will have on the Spitalfields residents both in the
short and in the long-term.
3613. On Monday Mr Mould suggested that Dr Safir,
as a member of the Community Liaison Panel, would be useful for
providing health information, and he agreed that he would. In
that forum he can only really give health information in general
terms as none of us are health professionals on the Community
Liaison Panel, apart from Dr Safir. It was also suggested that
Dr Safir should actually approach the primary care trust and the
environmental health people to ask them what they are doing. This
is a major, major project and surely Crossrail have some responsibility
for taking the initiative. You asked Mr Wheeler about whether
they had actually contacted directly the people affected in the
Georgian houses and it seems it is a fairly cavalier approach
as to whether you get chosen or whether you do not. It seems to
us on the matter, for instance, of local environmental health
we know in Tower Hamlets, because of budget cuts and for a variety
of reasons, there are a very, very limited number of environmental
health officers in the borough and they have got enough on their
hands dealing with all sorts of other issues that relate to our
area.
3614. Mr Mould also suggested that the PCT might
want to take the lead. I notice that the Committee members commented
that some PCTs have a lot of money. It may well be that Tower
Hamlets PCT has a lot of money but it has also got a lot of health
issues it has to deal with directly, and we would be very opposed
to the idea that PCT actually used any of the money that should
be used for the health of local people to consider setting up
a health impact assessment. However, we believe that Crossrail
could go to the PCT and say, "We need to set up a site-specific
health impact assessment for Spitalfields". We would also
want it for Stepney and the Isle of Dogs because there are two
more major construction sites, but I am only talking to you here
about Spitalfields.
3615. CHAIRMAN: Ms Cove, you will be
coming onto this panel no doubt in due course, but the difficulty
is this so far as we are concerned: it has been said that PAL
are being paid for by Crossrail, therefore they are not impartial.
If Crossrail starts inviting members of the Panel to do this that
and the other are we not in danger of an accusation that they
are not impartial?
3616. MS COVE: No, I am sorry, PCT is
the primary care trust.
3617. CHAIRMAN: I know it is.
3618. MS COVE: It is different from Planning
Aid for London. We are saying that, apart from the Community Liaison
Panel, we should have a site-specific health impact assessment
for Spitalfields where it is specifically dealing with information
and knowledge of local professional experts in health matters;
and that Crossrail could go to the PCT and say, "We need
to set this up. We need to look at this as an issue. Can you please
give us the names of the experts that are appropriate to actually
form this panel?" That is entirely different from the Community
Liaison Panel. Dr Safir is willing to be part of that site-specific
health impact assessment; and he would also be a member of the
Community Liaison Panel and be able to provide the link between
the two.
3619. CHAIRMAN: So you want another panel?
|
