4 March 2016
Greenwich Council has approved plans for a cruise liner terminal on the River Thames. Under these plans floating hotels will dock at Enderby Wharf on the Greenwich Peninsula for extended periods, running off diesel generators that spew out as much NO2 and particulate matter as 688 HGV’s per hour.
A local resident of East Greenwich has challenged Greenwich Council’s decision of December 2015 on the grounds are that there has been inadequate assessment of the air pollution that will arise from ships and associated development in the area.
The court case, which is being advised upon by Dr Paul Stookes of law firm Richard Buxton Environmental & Public Law Solicitors and led by a member of the East Greenwich Resident Association (EGRA), needs £6,000 to begin. If successful there will be a call for more donations, up to £16.000 in total may be required to take the case to court.
We are asking all our members to please donate to help save our clean air: https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/cruise-liner/
From the start local residents have consistently called for clean onshore power supply to be provided to avoid dangerous emissions in a dense residential neighbourhood.
Findings by a King's College report recently showed that almost 9,500 Londoners die prematurely each year from the combined effects of NO2 and PM2.5 particulate matter.
The threat is real and deadly.
Cruise ships are planned to dock for the six summer months, when pollution in London is at its worst, and dirty diesel emissions will affect large populations on both banks of the river.
Green Party Candidate for London Mayor Sian Berry said that it’s astonishing a Labour local authority and the Conservative Mayor have united to force a cruise terminal on the unwilling residents of Greenwich and the Isle of Dogs, ignoring pleas for the hotelling ships to use clean onshore power rather than dirty diesel fuel.
“I congratulate the brave resident who is standing up to Greenwich Council by applying for judicial review, and I fully support the wider community in its bid to raise financial backing. If I’m elected to City Hall in May, I will endeavour to rectify this mess so that local people – not to mention the occupants of the new homes being built next to the terminal – are not put in danger.”
It is also understood that mitigation measures such as onshore power will be obligatory by 2025 begging the question: what is the use of building a cruise port that may be obsolete in 7 years?
EGRA Chair, Dan Hayes says:
"We believe that the planning decision is short-sighted and ruinous to Londoners’ health. Nearly 10,000 people die of air pollution in our capital each year and far more suffer ill-health because of bad air. We have been constantly exhorted to use public transport, buy cleaner cars or cycle, only to have dirty developments thrust on our communities. It’s time to call a halt on decision-making that makes air pollution much worse for Londoners, and the Cruise Terminal proposal, without on shore power, is a striking example of this.”
Given London’s worldwide status as a top tourist destination, we can see the Cruise Terminals appeal. Once completed, a quick return on investment can almost be taken for granted; making it all the more surprising that the developers should be allowed to cut corners.
With all rational pleas falling on deaf ears, local residents are becoming increasingly frustrated by the Council’s decision to put developer interests above those of their residents and the local environment. This unfortunately has become a trend across the borough, from the Cable Car to the Silvertown Tunnel.
We in the Greenwich Green Party standby firmly on the side of our community and our environment and we ask that you support us as we stand with residents to fight for a clean and healthy environment.