Bowes Labour at NLWP Preliminary Hearing

"Amongst the many other oppositional voices, we think that the angle we should emphasize is air quality.

"Residents may remember that one of the first things that Enfield Labour did, on gaining the Council back two years ago, was to re-check smog outside of Bowes Primary, in the wake of Boris Johnson's decision to exempt white vans from 'low emissions zones'. Lo and behold, we discovered that there are [some number of] days a year when particulates and other noxious gases are above European tolerance levels. Not only does that present an ongoing danger to the health of residents and especially young pupils, it is also relevant to the Pinkham Way debate, since the lorries going up the North Circular will add to local air pollution.

"And by the way, if the alternative to Pinkham Way were Edmonton, we'd have the same problem, i.e. more waste trucks on the North Circular (as they trundle past Bowes on the way to Edmonton), thus more smog.

"That is one of the reasons that the Bowes Labour approach from the beginning of this whole sorry saga has been 'No to Pinkham Way' but also 'No to Edmonton', i.e. there must be better alternatives for London's waste. If only Enfield's old Conservative administration hadn't let their friends in Barnet off the hook, back when potential sites were first being reviewed.

"That was especially relevant at the procedural pre-hearing today, which saw an in-depth discussion, whether it might be possible to re-do the scoring used back in 2008-2009, to exclude certain sites but leave others (e.g. Pinkham Way) as likely possibilities - a decision signed off by Terry Neville, Enfield Conservative Lead for Environment, at the time. 

"The Inspector ruled the way Bowes Labour would like (adjusting scores for today's parameters) but in the meantime, as you know, Barnet has been able to take the best alternative site (Staples Corner) off the table. You couldn't make it up.

"Anyway, we're no lawyers, but we're aware that there is a hierarchy of law with international regulations, often coming above national ones. Thus, by invoking European air quality legislation, we hope to have an effect. Other fellow travellers (Pinkham Way Alliance, etc.) will have other lines of attack. That will be ours.

"That all explains the email exchange below, making sure that we can speak up on the day. We'll give 200%, but it's still a very daunting challenge. Something smells very fishy here, with the NLWA saying that irrespective of Haringey's decision, they're confident that the current plan (with Pinkham Way) will go through. How can they be so confident they'll win if they go over Haringey's head?"

From: "LDF Programme Officer"
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 4:19 PM
To: "'Alan Sitkin'"
Subject: RE: Pls list me as participant for 19 & 20 Pinkham Way hearing
Dear Alan,

Thank you for your email of today's date.

Further to our conversation this morning, I confirm I will add the Bowes Ward Councillors to the list of those participating at the Pinkham Way hearing on the next version of the Draft Hearings Programme.

Regards,

Pauline Butcher
PROGRAMME OFFICER

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Sitkin [mailto:Transalver@talktalk.net]
Sent: 12 April 2012 11:58
To: ldfprogrammeofficer@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: Pls list me as participant for 19 & 20 Pinkham Way hearing

Dear Pauline,
We've already had correspondence on this, but given that the Inspector has just said that only listed persons may speak at the hearings and my registered objection was lodged in due form, I'm strongly requesting that I be added to this list in the name of Bowes Ward Labour Councillors, so that I may speak on the day on one of the elements specified in my original email, namely air quality (where I would want to ascertain compliance with European legislation).

Thank you for confirming that I will be added to the list in the above group name.

Cllr Alan Sitkin
London Borough of Enfield
Bowes Ward