Sadiq Khan’s claims that 4,000 people will die each year as a result of air pollution to justify his controversial ULEZ expansion are “misleading and incorrect,” according to a new report.
According to climate change researcher Ben Pile, the scheme’s entire foundation is “flawed.”
Climate Debate, his campaign group, and fellow anti-ULEZ activists Together Association are calling for the Mayor of London and TFL to cancel the rollout of low-emission zones.
“Sadiq Khan has ignored scientists’ warnings and scientific debate about the problem of expressing mortality risk as ‘deaths’ in order to produce an extremely alarming statistic,” Ben said.
“But following the science reveals that there is no basis for his claim that 4,000 Londoners lose their life to air pollution each year.“
In his determination to advance his radical policy agenda, Khan’s bad science and statistics-abuse has caused distress and fear in countless people who rightly want the best for their families and communities.
“The science clearly states that there is insufficient evidence to establish a causal link between exposure to air pollution and mortality.”
The Ultra Low Emission Zone is set to be expanded across all London boroughs in August, requiring all motorists whose vehicles do not meet TFL’s emission standards to pay a daily charge of £12.50.
Mr Khan stated in November of last year, “Around 4,000 Londoners die prematurely each year as a result of long-term exposure to air pollution, with the greatest number of deaths in outer London boroughs.”
The report by Ben Pile demonstrating that neither the UKHSA nor COMEAP find evidence of a causal link in the scientific literature, and explicitly advise against framing the potential mortality risk associated with air pollution exposure in terms of deaths, sends a coach and horses through Sadiq Khan’s irresponsible and intentionally dishonest claims of 4000 deaths per year.
“Khan is aware of this, but continues to promote this figure in a desperate attempt to scare enough Londoners into supporting ULEZ expansion.” It devalues science, health policy, and public trust in elected officials.”