FARNHAM town councillor Jeremy Ricketts sparked a debate at last Thursday’s full council meeting as he raised the ongoing issue of Farnham’s rising air pollution levels. However, in the process he criticised the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan, much to the disgust of fellow members.

According to the former Mayor of Farnham, the Government is asking for the help of local authorities to tackle the remaining localised pockets of air pollution within their areas.

Mr Ricketts believes that Farnham Town Council is ideally placed to take up this challenge if they so choose. “Air pollution hastens the deaths of many of our residents and causes untold suffering from asthma, strokes, cancers and dementia. Do we really need this?” he said.

“We have a choice, consider the health implications in all that we do or put other things before health.”

However, to the annoyance of a number of councillors, within his motion Mr Ricketts criticised the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan (which gained an overwhelming ‘yes’ vote in favour of its adoption in May), stating that it is an “excellent” example of where the council was not allowed to consider health when making its recommendations.

In his opinion, as a result 94 per cent of all the development for the next generation is being concentrated into the most polluted parts of the town.

“Farnham Town Council resolved that public health is important to us and we should use openness, transparency and admit our mistakes in everything we do,” Mr Ricketts added.

“Now the Neighbourhood Plan is completed we should conduct a related review, which looks at the impact of the planned housing development on the areas of high air pollution now the Government has requested our help.”

First to address Mr Ricketts’ motion, was the leader of the council, Carole Cockburn, who has been highly passionate about the plan since day one.

She thought it was “extraordinary” that a councillor would denigrate four years’ work by the residents in producing the Neighbourhood Plan.

“The fact we have one councillor lay all the blame of future air pollution on this document, is quite frankly nonsense, absolute nonsense,” she said.

“It shows a complete lack of understanding of land use, of planning and the power of the Neighbourhood Plan that’s been developed.

“I will not support any motion that puts the blame on the Neighbourhood Plan, the sweat and tears of so many residents and it’s absolutely disgraceful for any town councillor not to be fully supportive at this stage.

“I will not have the plan implicated in the future destruction of peoples lives. It’s a planning document, it’s a land use document, and that’s all it is.”

Wrecclesham and Rowledge member Paula Dunsmore seconded the motion as a campaign, one to provide a strategy and two to roll out suggestions.

She made members aware of an 18-month survey, involving Winchester pupils aged from six to 18, carried out by Hampshire County Council and Winchester City Council, to measure the levels of nitrogen dioxide around school grounds.

They have used the evidence to devise plans to help reduce air pollution and congestion locally.

Farnham Residents councillor David Beaman, who voted against the motion, told The Herald after the meeting that all councillors are concerned about air pollution, but the motion was lost because it linked air pollution to the Neighbourhood Plan and called for it to be reviewed in the light of health considerations.

He also stated the fact that Mr Ricketts had his own personal planning application to build nine houses on land (Knowle Farm in Old Park Lane) not designated as suitable for residential development by the Neighbourhood Plan, subject to appeal after refusal by Waverley Borough Council.

Following the meeting, Mr Ricketts told The Herald that scientists have found that previously developed brown field sites (such as his) are often contaminated and this increases risks to health.

The advice is that his site must be cleaned before further residential usage – but unfortunately there is no legislation to insist on protecting the six homes already existing.

According to research, asbestos has been known to cause health problems for decades and becomes more of a risk as the buildings age. Mr Ricketts noted that Waverley’s environmental health service recognises this and supports the remediation of the site to bring it into beneficial use.

Following the discussion in the council chambers, Mr Ricketts was given the opportunity to withdraw his motion so that a revised motion focused on increasing awareness and education could be brought forward to the next full council meeting on Thursday, July 27, but he declined to take up this opportunity.

Overall three members voted in favour of the motion, with 10 against.