Meeting of the Parliament 12 March 2014
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on air quality. It is useful that Labour is using its debating time to highlight this important issue.
Claire Baker set out effectively the Scottish Government’s failures to meet EU air quality standards. We recognise that, overall, significant reductions have been made in air pollutants from the 1990 baselines, but it is a concern to all of us in the Parliament that unacceptably high levels of air pollution—especially from nitrogen dioxide, which causes increased ground-level ozone and particulate matter—were measured in 2013 in some of the busiest commuter and shopping streets in Scotland, such as Byres Road and Hope Street in Glasgow and Queensferry Road in Edinburgh. As has been pointed out, some of the high levels of air pollution break targets that were set in the 1990s and which were to be met by 2005 under the Air Quality (Scotland) Regulations 2000.
All of us know that nitrogen oxides in our environment cause acid rain, which damages plant and animal life in forests, lochs and rivers and harms buildings and historical sites. High levels of nitrogen oxides can cause eutrophication, which threatens biodiversity through the excessive growth of plant algae. Planting more trees in urban areas can help to mitigate levels of some air pollutants and we support that.
As the Labour motion makes clear, poor air quality has a potentially severe impact on human health. It has been suggested that air pollution is a factor in more than 1,500 deaths in Scotland each year, which must be a major concern. At high concentrations, nitrogen dioxide and particulates can cause inflammation of the airways and affect lung capacity. Some studies suggest that long-term exposure to fine particulate matter may be associated with increased rates of chronic bronchitis. As a sufferer of respiratory problems, I am conscious of the effect of poor air quality. To put it simply, it can be much harder for many Scots to breathe in congested city streets.
The presence and concentration of pollutants in our air are very affected by the prevailing climatic conditions. I commend the efforts of the Met Office in Scotland, which is working with community health partnerships and doctors to support people in self-managing some long-term conditions that are known to be impacted by weather conditions. The Met Office’s healthy outlook service helps those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Research that was recently published in the BMJ suggested that exposure to fine particles in the air increases the risk of heart attacks and unstable angina, as well as having an impact on those who suffer from respiratory illnesses such as asthma and COPD.
My amendment refers to the Scottish Government’s failures to meet overall emissions targets. Meeting those targets, tackling climate change and improving air quality are all interconnected and shared aims. Progress in each area will mean corresponding progress elsewhere. It is important that Scotland meets and is seen to meet air quality targets as we seek to persuade other nations of the need to take action. It is ironic that Scotland—a country that is renowned worldwide for its beautiful mountain scenery and clean environment—should be plagued by bad air quality in specific areas. We have the great advantage of masses of space for our population, so we should be ahead of the game and not languishing behind on the targets.