Agenda item

Invitees:         Steve Manning (Senior Scientific Officer)

Silvia-Gonzales Lopez (Head of Environment and Public Protection)

The Head of Environment and Public Protection presented the report.

·       The Committee questioned why there had been a gap between Plans and why NO₂ was the only particulate measured. The Senior Scientific Officer noted the gap between Plans and assured Committee that updating the Plan had been their focus in the three years since they had joined Newport City Council. They informed Committee that NO₂ was measured as it was what they were most readily able to monitor and NO₂ values could indicate with reasonable certainty the levels of other particulates. They informed Committee that with future legislation and the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act in 2025, there would be greater emphasis placed on other monitoring, but they were waiting on direction and resource from Welsh Government (WG) for this.

·       The Committee asked for the parameters shown in table 5.5 to be explained in layperson’s terms and the Senior Scientific Officer did this.

·       The Committee felt that the report was difficult to read and understand which could be improved upon to ensure that the information is accessible. The Senior Scientific Officer explained that the document was fairly raw and agreed it could be improved but explained that they had to adhere to the template provided by WG and ensure that all information required to be reported is demonstrated. The Head of Environment and Public Protection noted that a secondary, more accessible document could be created to accompany the technical document and consultation process. The Committee welcomed a summary document.

·       The Committee asked how data for 2024 had been collected. The Senior Scientific Officer explained that the data had been predicted via modelling.

·       The Committee asked whether the 20mph limit would affect pollution. The Senior Scientific Officer highlighted the modelling data but informed Committee that they must also look to real-world examples, and that no significant issue was added as a result.

·       The Committee noted that some monitored areas had seen no change or a worsening air quality report. The Senior Scientific Officer highlighted that areas that approached breaching air quality standards would require an in-depth monitoring review but noted that the overall trend showed a decrease.

·       The Committee asked whether this report would be presented to Cabinet. The Head of Environment and Public Protection noted that it would be presented to Cabinet post-consultation.

·       The Committee felt that the animation provided was helpful but raised concern regarding the consultation survey questions and asked what they wanted from the public from the consultation. The Senior Scientific Officer explained that it was a work in progress. The Head of Environment and Public Protection assured Committee that the consultation was not limited to the document provided and informed Committee that there were direct discussions taking place with AQMA groups and organisations and that the survey was designed to capture third party views.

·       The Committee highlighted that there were 17 questions in the survey document and only 5 were directly relevant to the information regarding air quality. The Head of Environment and Public Protection noted that there were a number of questions standard in any survey. The Strategic Director for Transformation and Corporate highlighted that equalities data questions were optional to those answering a survey and was included to ensure communities were not missed from receiving information.

Invitees:         Steve Manning (Senior Scientific Officer)

Silvia-Gonzales Lopez (Head of Environment and Public Protection)

The Head of Environment and Public Protection presented the report.

·       The Committee questioned why there had been a gap between Plans and why NO₂ was the only particulate measured. The Senior Scientific Officer noted the gap between Plans and assured Committee that updating the Plan had been their focus in the three years since they had joined Newport City Council. They informed Committee that NO₂ was measured as it was what they were most readily able to monitor and NO₂ values could indicate with reasonable certainty the levels of other particulates. They informed Committee that with future legislation and the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act in 2025, there would be greater emphasis placed on other monitoring, but they were waiting on direction and resource from Welsh Government (WG) for this.

·       The Committee asked for the parameters shown in table 5.5 to be explained in layperson’s terms and the Senior Scientific Officer did this.

·       The Committee felt that the report was difficult to read and understand which could be improved upon to ensure that the information is accessible. The Senior Scientific Officer explained that the document was fairly raw and agreed it could be improved but explained that they had to adhere to the template provided by WG and ensure that all information required to be reported is demonstrated. The Head of Environment and Public Protection noted that a secondary, more accessible document could be created to accompany the technical document and consultation process. The Committee welcomed a summary document.

·       The Committee asked how data for 2024 had been collected. The Senior Scientific Officer explained that the data had been predicted via modelling.

·       The Committee asked whether the 20mph limit would affect pollution. The Senior Scientific Officer highlighted the modelling data but informed Committee that they must also look to real-world examples, and that no significant issue was added as a result.

·       The Committee noted that some monitored areas had seen no change or a worsening air quality report. The Senior Scientific Officer highlighted that areas that approached breaching air quality standards would require an in-depth monitoring review but noted that the overall trend showed a decrease.

·       The Committee asked whether this report would be presented to Cabinet. The Head of Environment and Public Protection noted that it would be presented to Cabinet post-consultation.

·       The Committee felt that the animation provided was helpful but raised concern regarding the consultation survey questions and asked what they wanted from the public from the consultation. The Senior Scientific Officer explained that it was a work in progress. The Head of Environment and Public Protection assured Committee that the consultation was not limited to the document provided and informed Committee that there were direct discussions taking place with AQMA groups and organisations and that the survey was designed to capture third party views.

·       The Committee highlighted that there were 17 questions in the survey document and only 5 were directly relevant to the information regarding air quality. The Head of Environment and Public Protection noted that there were a number of questions standard in any survey. The Strategic Director for Transformation and Corporate highlighted that equalities data questions were optional to those answering a survey and was included to ensure communities were not missed from receiving information.

Conclusions:

·       The Committee recommended that a summary document be created that is accessible and understandable for laypeople and includes hyperlinks to other relevant documents for those who wish to read further. The Committee recommended that this is published to the website and alongside the consultation document.

The Chair ended the broadcast to receive the confidential Scrutiny Topic Referral.