7th September 2023
“Behold how good it is to dwell together in unity.” Ps 133:1
Recently I was sitting outside Parliament as part of the weekly Earth Vigil, praying for the wellbeing of the earth, for wisdom and discernment for those in positions of authority, and relief for those who are suffering. Parliament Square is a regular place of protest – especially on Wednesdays when PMQs takes place. Some protestors come weekly, others sporadically, and their concerns range from the welfare of women in Iran, victims of oppression in Armenia, lack of finance for special educational needs, anti – Brexit complaints, justice for fathers… This particular week the noisiest protest group were the Anti ULEZ campaigners. They came whistles and truck horns, an air raid siren, loud hailers, and – on the streets – a succession of old non ULEZ compliant vehicles which were driven noisily round and round Parliament Square. As well as being physically noisy, they carried placards which were visually ‘noisy’ calling named individuals as liar and rats, or claiming that Sadiq Khan had blood on his hands. They spoke of the toxic air lies and the death of democracy. They declared ‘Our roads, our freedom’.
Clearly a significant group of people felt aggrieved by the extension to the ULEZ boundary. How can this situation be remedied if we are to ‘live together in unity’? And what about the competing demands – rights – of those who suffer from the adverse effects of air pollution? Or of the need to reduce carbon emissions to forestall the worsening effects of climate change? Or what about the difficulties faced by those who cannot afford private transport and must rely on public transport? Who is standing up for their needs – their rights?
Dialogue has to be one way forward: being able to listen to the other and in return presenting a well constructed counter argument. And hopefully finding some areas of overlap, adjustment or compromise. (Although we may this hard if we are convinced that we are right).
In this instance, would the aim of the dialogue be to encourage the anti-ULEZ campaigners to see that there are other interests to take into account? Ie those with health issues, the young and the elderly who are more vulnerable to air pollution – and that taxpayers and society bears the cost of poor health caused by air pollution. (A study carried out in 2020 calculated cost of air pollution in London to be £10.32 billion a year. The research quantified the monetary value of premature death, hospital treatment, lost working days and other health costs caused by particulate matter, ozone and nitrogen dioxide. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/21/london-the-worst-city-in-europe-for-health-costs-from-air-pollution)
Would another area of discussion be to explore the use of private vehicles as part of an integrated transport scheme that would benefit more people? Here do I need to learn more about people’s dependency on private vehicles, the advantages this opportunity gives them, and, if this dependency were to change, how they could best be supported and what alternatives they would be seeking?
And likewise a discussion to explore how private vehicles and an integrated transport scheme can tackle the climate crisis, together with an exploration of how the increasing change in the climate is – and will increasingly continue – affecting people’s lives?
And might there be scope for discussing how decisions are made and how our political system could be improved?
Notes to self:
How easily can people get to my local hospitals by public transport/ active travel?
Ditto dental and GP surgeries
Ditto churches, crematoria and cemeteries
How easily can people get to local shops and supermarkets by public transport/ active travel? Do shops offer delivery services?
How easily can people get to local parks, recreation centres, swimming pools, green and blue spaces by public transport/ active travel? What about theatres and cinemas, and local visitor destinations – and is this true late into the evening too?
How easily can people get to local school, colleges, places of learning and libraries by public’s transport/ active travel?
How easily can people get to local places of employment by public transport/ active travel? And is this true late at night and early in the morning? How do people who work in the public transport sector get to work?
What facilities or provision would help tradespeople moving between jobs, or for carers moving between clients? Do we expect midwives to revert back to bicycles or should we see provision of an electric car for them as part of the local infrastructure?
If all these come back with positives for my locality, is the same true of other areas or do I live in a well-serviced area?
I live in an urban area but how would these questions play out in a rural setting?
If I am setting up an event or meeting, do I consider ease of access as an important criteria?
The Green Tau 