A SHOCK admission by Waverley leaves Farnham up in the air as to whether it has a pollution problem or not.

Red-faced borough council chiefs have confessed that they had got their figures wrong in their latest air quality report, published in May, thus invalidating its findings.

The admission also calls into question the validity of previous annual air quality reports that have used the same basis of calculation.

In a statement on Tuesday, a Waverley spokesman said: “An independent assessment of the Waverley Borough Council 2016 Air Quality Report has now been concluded and has shown that the bias factor used by the council is incorrect.

“A subsequent investigation by the council has led us to believe that the data from January 2016 to September 2017 is wrong.

“The council is immediately starting a comprehensive audit of our air quality monitoring and reporting arrangements, as well as ensuring that the data is correct from now on. We are using an independent auditor, independent air quality and monitoring specialists and DEFRA to assist with this urgent review of our current arrangements.

“All borough councillors have been informed today. As part of the review we will be working closely with members of the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Audit Committee.

“Following the review we will bring forward recommendations to ensure that our processes are enhanced and more robust.”

The borough council commissioned an independent review of its 2016 Air Quality Report following a complaint by Farnham-based air quality expert David Harvey, director of West Street firm ADM Ltd, that it had got its figures wrong.

The report, which was published in May, claimed air pollution - and specifically levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) - only “slightly exceeds” the national objective at three monitoring stations in Farnham; two in The Borough and one in Wrecclesham Road.

Mr Harvey believes Waverley had miscalculated two crucial ‘bias adjustment factors’ used to counter discrepancies between the council’s monitoring equipment, which make the difference between there being an “overall improvement in air quality across the borough”, as claimed by the council, and air quality having actually deteriorated.

Welcoming the borough council’s admission, he said: “It looks like I have been vindicated. I am pleased that Waverley have acknowledge the errors in their air quality report and am looking forward to taking up their offer of working with them to establish what the air quality in Farnham is really like.

“This is a right old mess. It could be that Waverley have got it wrong for years and that there never was an air quality problem. This is the first time Waverley has acknowledged it got it wrong and it may be worse than I initially suspected.

“It’s too early to say what the findings will be but there is a high likelihood that there was never a problem, which will be phenomenally embarrassing. I have asked to see the raw data for 2015.”

Mr Harvey submitted a ‘Level 3’ complaint in August to Waverley’s new executive director Tom Horwood, the final stage of the borough council’s complaints procedure, demanding Waverley acknowledge and rectify its mistakes.

In correspondence between DEFRA and Waverley, seen by The Herald, DEFRA had asked Waverley to explain the “potential discrepancies” .

DEFRA acknowledged that there was an error in the 2016 report in June.