Schools planned on old waste sites

There are a large number of old schools, in Wales, which need replacing. The Assembly is insisting that councils must enter into Public Private Partnership schemes. There are also 968 contaminated sites in Wales, approximately half of them old waste tips. The need for new schools, PPP schemes and contaminated land have been brought together in Llandudno and Newport to the concern of local people.

John Bright High School in Llandudno and Durham Road Primary School in St Julians, Newport, Gwent, are both old schools. John Bright was built at the turn of the 19th Century, Durham Road is Victorian. John Bright High School, desperately needs new facilities and a new school is a reasonable option. Durham Road Primary School needs much more space and a decent play area for the children; the only play area is a concreted yard and children are being taught in corridors. Friends of the Earth are fully in support of both communities getting new schools.

However, there are a number of issues which Friends of the Earth (FOE) Cymru are concerned about as Conwy and Newport councils propose to;
• site the proposed new schools on old waste tips,
• sell the present school sites, the present John Bright site for retail development, the Durham Road School for houses.
These proposals fail to address the lack of sufficient open spaces in either Llandudno or Newport.

Conwy council commissioned a report into "the future role of Llandudno as a sub-regional shopping centre". Although the Development Plan did not allow for retail development on the site of the John Bright School such development was still supported by the council. Somehow the issue of retail development became immeshed with the need for a new school. This is in spite of the land having been covenanted to the council for "educational purposes".

Newport Council bought land for a new school several years ago, but are to sell that site and the present school site for the same reason that Conwy Council is selling their school site -to raise money to make a Public Private Partnership affordable under Private Finance Initiatives. Indeed the only difference is that Conwy Council is selling the school site for retail, Newport is selling its two sites for housing.

Both developments are in contradiction of the areas development plans, which were agreed in consultation with local communities. The Llandudno present school site is earmarked for "Educational Purposes" the old waste tip for "warehousing". In Newport nearly 2,000 more homes are to be built than the development plan says are needed. That is even if other smaller developments intended are left out.

There is serious concern as to where the new schools are to be sited. The councils appear to have concluded that they could not afford to pay for other sites. However, councils do not own much land and the choices were few. Both council areas already lack sufficient open spaces. In the end the councils both chose the sites of old waste tips which have caused concern to parents.

Residents, in Llandudno contacted Conwy FOE because they could not get the council to address their concerns about the site. FOE Cymru heard about the concerns of parents in Newport and on contacting the Parents Action Group were amazed to discover that the situation in Newport was so similar to the one in Conwy.

Both councils have refused to release information to parents. (1) This is also generating concern. In Conwy the response of the council to residents concerns has been to accuse FOE Cymru of scare mongering! The councils seam unable to understand that failing to allow open access to information to parents concerned about their children's health will result in people fearing the worst.

Why Children and Waste Tips Should Not Be Mixed

A 1997 Report of the Child Health Workgroup of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the American agency which oversees waste sites, states:

"Developing human beings in the womb and through puberty can be uniquely vulnerable to environmental toxicants..." Describing some of the differences between adults and children ands exploring the ways in which children are more susceptible the report goes on to state that "The obvious implication for environmental health is that children will have substantially greater exposures than adults to toxicants that are present in water food or air".The report outlines the necessity for a precautionary approach to exposing children to toxins arguing that without caution there is "excessive risk of neurological impairment, developmental disabilities, reproductive damage, cancer or premature death associated with their environmental exposure....Environmental toxicants are a persistent and growing cause of preventable illness in children. Knowledge about this group of illnesses is growing. That we can anticipate the occurrence of these illnesses is a challenge; that we can prevent or mitigate these illnesses makes such actions an imperative.

The report also points out that "Children's main occupation is attending school and schools may pose toxic hazards by virtue of location." The report recommends that old waste tips should have a paediatrician employed to monitor children's health until after the site is cleaned up. "Paediatric expertise, should", the report suggests, "be represented at each stage of the process, including preliminary proposals and all steps to final clearance". There are several potential conflicts of interest that could be resolved if a health trust employee, a paediatrician, whose first and only concern was the health of children, were to be seconded to oversee the clean up of contaminated sites.

Friends of the Earth has little information as to the actual level of danger because
we do not know what was originally dumped in these tips;
we do not know if gases have leaked out from the site into the neighbouring area;
we do not know what testing has been done, nor by who, nor what the testing has shown.

However, whether or not methane, a highly explosive gas, or asbestos dust, or any of a whole host of toxins that could be in the site, have, or will, escape into the air around the area of the intended school and playing fields or not -we cannot support any decision which legally compels children and young people to attend a school and play on fields which are on contaminated land.

What The Assembly Says: What It Does

The Assembly made commitments, last May, published in Better Wales, to "Ensure children and young people are treated as valued members of our community" and also insisted that the values and principles that the Assembly has determined should define the quality of life that children and young people can expect are themselves underpinned by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child". (2
Lesley McCarthy, Children's Rights Worker at FOE Cymru pointed out that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child assures to children their survival and development by recognising their right to be healthy(3)

She commented that:

"If children are valued members of our community, why are the valuable sites of their schools being sold off and the children dumped on a waste tip!"

Both councils are saying that the Assembly are insisting that this is the only way they can provide the new schools that children need. Planning officials on behalf of Sue Essex, the Environment Minister in the Assembly, have written to the campaigners against these schemes insisting that these are local issues.

However Lesley McCarthy asked:

"If these are local issues involving only local councils and local schools then why are the local councils being forced into PFI schemes and not allowed to borrow the money needed to build the schools somewhere safer?

She continued:

"Already, before these schools are even built both the Assembly and the councils are opting out of accepting responsibility. Once the schools are built and the children are attending the schools what happens if ongoing checking shows that methane gas and other carcinogenic substances are being released into the school grounds? There will be nowhere for the children to go to school, their old site will be being built on and the new one dangerous. We will not really know if these schemes are safe for at least a generation as toxins can cause congenital deformities in the next generation. Children's health and welfare is far too important to risk in this way"

There are also concerns at transport issues. In Llandudno parents are asking how much traffic will be generated from what could be a 24 hour hypermarket. (There is a primary school only yards away) . In Newport, Keith Turner the Chief Constable wrote to the council "I must stress that it is felt that this development will lead to an increase in the number of complaints we receive about "rat running" vehicles, we also anticipate an increase in the number of Road Traffic Accidents..."

Friends of the Earth Cymru are calling on the Assembly to call in these planning permissions. FOE Cymru want a cross section of Assembly Members with Assembly Planning Officers, to whom information denied to parents would be available, to look at the proposals and to take responsibility for any decision made as to whether or not to go ahead with these schemes.

Notes

In Conwy the council has informed us that:
testing of the site since March 2000 is subject to commercial considerations and cannot be released and the information relating to before March is all contained within a single file and this file cannot be seen when in use by any one of several officers or committees.

In Newport parents have been told they can only see information relating to testing done over 10 years ago. Gases in waste tips build up over time. The situation 10 years ago is an insufficient indicator as to the, presence or extent of methane gases present now.
(1) Letter from Julia Williams on behalf of Jane Hutt 19th June 2000
(3) Article 6 states that:
"...State Parties shall assure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child
Article 24
State Parties recognise the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health..."