Forum Topic

H&F get it right - why can't Hounslow folllow

As Adrian Irving pointed out recently, Hammersmith & Fulham certainly do seem to have taken some good steps to maintaining their borough.  Would that Hounslow could follow suit.https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/articles/news/2017/07/hf-unveils-new-chemical-free-weeding-treatments H&F unveils new chemical-free weeding treatmentsPublish date 27 July 2017Image 1: New non-chemical weed killers in use at Fulham PalaceLast year we were one of the first councils in the country to halt the standardised use of potentially harmful glyphosate weed killers from being sprayed in public places.We took this step to better protect people and their pets but also to safeguard bees and other wildlife essential to our environment.We've been trialling new non-chemical alternatives – with hot foam and hot water being the chosen treatments now being used across the borough.“The standardised spraying of toxic chemicals is not good for our environment or for all of us who live and work in it. So we've been trialling other environmentally-positive approaches.” said Cllr Wesley Harcourt, H&F Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and Residents’ Services."There have been teething problems which we're fixing but we're determined to keep our streets some of the cleanest anywhere while also striving to be the greenest borough in the country.TreatmentsTo watch this video, please accept statistics cookies and reload this page.The council’s contractors are now using a hot foam treatment across our parks and estates and a hot water treatment for roadside weeds.To use these new treatments, we had to buy completely new equipment and train our staff how to use it.The new non-chemical treatments are kinder to the environment, so are better for bees and other wildlife, as well as people.A borough-wide weeding program is currently underway. If your street has not yet been treated, it will be done shortly.Due to the size of some of the weeds, they may need more than one treatment to be killed off, but the teams will also weed by hand to ensure unsightly weeds are kept to a minimum.To report a weed issue or other street mess, download our Report It app to your smartphone, or report it online.You can also find out what else we’re doing to become the greenest borough in the country and how you can help.

Rae Lewis ● 609d73 Comments

Just in case you just thought it was just a few of us who would prefer this to only be used as a last resort if at all when there is even more worrying negative info about it around together with missing documentation.https://actions.eko.org/a/eu-leaders-ban-glyphosate/?akid=126591.18764420.4ekQ80&rd=1&source=fwd&t=13

Philippa Bond ● 577d

That's not domething to be proud of:https://www.wwf.org.uk/future-of-uk-nature#:~:text=The%20UK%20is%20one%20of,than%2040%25%20are%20in%20decline.

Philippa Bond ● 577d

No, glyphosate is very controversial and is continuously being assessed. Even if the EU allow it the individual countries can and no doubt will make their own assessments. There are still plenty of court cases.  Why would their be new formulas of Round Up being sold that is marked as not having Glyphosate? These sorts of chemicals even with different mixes will continue to be controversial as it takes so long to see what effects they have.  Why take unnecessary risks just because it is an easy tick on your clipboard?https://www.gardenersworld.com/how-to/grow-plants/no-dig-gardening-guide/

Philippa Bond ● 578d

Lots of things are poisonous in sufficient amounts or particular circumtances. Tests on animals can involve feeding them copious amounts of a substance to see how much it takes to make them very ill or kill them. These tests are controversial. There are many things that in typical or even more than typical exposure do not cause harm, but if ingested in very large amounts are very harmful.  The list of things you use that could, harm you, if ingested in large amounts, or just ingested if that isn't how it is intended you'd use them, is a very long list. It includes Dish Washer tablets, green potatoes, cinnamon and just about everything under your sink pr in your garage. It is not intended that people ingest Glyphosate, although the evidence is that we do, as it is extensively used in agriculture and in our urine. It doesn't however seem to be causing us harm. Many plants are toxic; Yew, Laburnum, Ragwort. From a risk assessment point of view, good to teach children not to put random stuff into their mouth. This would include plants as well as chemicals.Many things that we all have in our homes and use regularly would fall into the category of very toxic if eaten. In a world ful of hazzards how do we function and make decisions about what to do and what to ban. There is a process called risk assessment. Authoritative bodies, the HSE and EU have risk asessed Glyphosate, looked at many studies and concluded it is safe for humans and the environment.The use of pesticides, chainsaws, flails, ferilizers, intensive animal farming and bulldozers, in industrial agriculture should be reduced. It is industrial agricutural practise that is inflicting great damage on the natural environment. Local Authorities banning a legal herbicide isn't going to help.

Kathleen Healy ● 588d

Lots of things are poisonous - and if we know or believe they are or might be - we make attempts to avoid them - to reduce them - and certainly not to increase or continue their use unless there really is no other option.  It can take a long time for the effects of some things to become obvious. The EU has directed countries to REDUCE the use of pesticides. We therefore should most definitely be erring on the side of caution if our Govt is not going to follow suit.https://issuu.com/pan-uk/docs/glyphosate_monograph_complete?e=28041656/43997864https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66297589

Philippa Bond ● 588d

Probable carcinogen the IARC part of WHO has glyphosate on a list. The same list includes eating red meat, working as a hairdresser and a wide range of substances. It is a hazard list the things on it haven't been risk assessed.To quote;Designation is applied when there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans as well as sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. In some cases, an agent may be classified in this group when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans along with sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals and strong evidence that the carcinogenesis is mediated by a mechanism that also operates in humans. Exceptionally, an agent may be classified in this group solely on the basis of limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans.The difference between identifying something as a hazard and a risk, is that in risk assessing something you assess the liklihod of the hazard causing harm. There are substances in apple seeds that metabolise in the body to form cyanide. Cyanide is highly poisonous to people so a big hazard. If you risk assess the hazard though, you find that you'd have to eat 50 apples in one go and crunch the seeds in your teeth or the whole seed would pass safely through your body. Hence apples are not banned for sale.Glyphpaste has been used for over 50 years.The campaing against it started when Monsanto (now owned by Bayer) developed genetically engineered crop seeds resistant to Glyphosate. Glyphosate use workwide has massively increased since these seeds were developed. These seeds arent sold or grown in the UK.Initially campaigners who were against GM argued that it would be dangerous to genetically modify plants to resist Glypohosate as they could cross breed with weeds and create super weeds resistant to Glyphosate. That didn't get much traction. The Glyphosate causes cancer campaign, has, however been hugely succesful.The EU and HSE have risk assessed Glyphosate and advise that it is safe for humans and the environment if used according to advice. People can and still do buy and use Glyphosate in their gardens with no training. To use Glyphosate on public land you have to be trained and pass a test. The training is mainly on how to protect yourself and the environment whilst using it. How to dispose f what is left. How to calculate how much you need to avoid having leftovers.Pavements wil get worse as perennial weeds grow year on year and all weeds multiply. Council's should risk asses the situation taking reliable advice and balancing the risk from Glyphosate against the risk from trips and falls, blocked drains, brioken pavements and tarmac.

Kathleen Healy ● 591d

Ooh, I look forward to receiving my free walking-stick along with my Council-issue hoe. A sedan chair would be nice as well.

Bruce Hammal ● 593d

https://www.homesandgardens.com/gardens/best-walkable-ground-cover-plants#:~:text=Try%20spacing%20the%20slabs%20in,through%20your%20yard%20and%20relaxing.OK not a pavement but paving does not have to have all greenery around sprayed and killed off with a weedkiller that has been declared a probable carcinogen with no notice to residents making it poisonous for us all as we walk along it and bring it into our homes.  It can be a couple of weeks after spraying until the paving is hoed and if it rains in the meantime that is not as effective and then that just goes into the drains.  Plants can also become more resistant to the weedkiller. The film shows the roots of a tree breaking through the tarmac - that I consider to be a far worse trip hazard as was a broken drain cover - with a hole big enough to take a size 9 foot and which was not easily visible in the rain that I reported online the other day and which now has safety barriers around it. Much of this sort of damage is caused by vehicles being driven over the pavements.I also wonder why there is such reticence by those who are so worried about tripping on pavements using a walking stick - when out walking in the countryside it is quite usual to use a stick - or alpine walking sticks.  If you find you are shuffling along then maybe a walking cane would be helpful. Is it because they just not fashionable any more - or because we don't want to feel that we are old enough?  https://wildjustice.org.uk/glyphosate/glyphosate-use-by-local-authorities/ We can't avoid it all but why subject us to more?

Philippa Bond ● 593d

I'm afraid you'll have to sit through the adverts.....https://youtu.be/hRs_2xqDlxA?feature=shared

Bruce Hammal ● 593d

Kathleen  I refer you back to previous posts.This is all about looking at a bigger picture and not just doing something simply because it is easier and because it is currently 'allowed'. It is about erring on the side of caution.If there is absolutely nothing to the 'cancer scares' as you put it why would Monsanto/Bayer have paid out/be paying out billions in court cases regarding not only the use of their weedkiller but also of the way they were advertising it? Have a look at the Wisner Baum cases.  Why would there be so much assessment and reassessment of it by the EU and individual countries in Europe? It was declared a possible carcinogen in people in 2015.  It is also considered to be harmful to aquatic life and to insects

Philippa Bond ● 594d

Philippa I quoted the ruling in the case you referred to.What are your qualifications and how many acres of land have you managed?The sources I am referring to are the EU report on Glyphosate issued this summer and by the HSE (Health & Safety Executive) The UK gvernments adviser on health and safety. Both concluded that Glyphosate was safe. The HSE suggests using it to prevent trip hazzards on hard surfaces.In banning a substance that is legal the council is making a protest, a boycott, a gesture. It is making no difference to the amount of Glyohosate people are exposed to as it used extensively in food production. It is making neglibible difference to the amount of Glyhosate used in the country for the same reason.The protest is a gesture, but it has a big impact on residents who have streets full of weeds. The aditional resources to make some small, temporary impact on the weeds could be used to plant and manage tubs and baskets, as happens in other Boroughs or to invest in ecological restoration in parks and open spaces. That would improve the environment and increase bio diversity.Do people not notice the difference when they visit neighbouring Boroughs?

Kathleen Healy ● 596d

Kathleen - Why exactly aren't you looking any further and getting more advice - and not simply relying on the self-interested manufacturers who do their own research, provide their own funding for research, don't provide all information to the EU or anyone else and so often hide behind commercial confidentiality?There are lots of different ways of dealing with grass around trees and protecting trees.  There are different ways of mulching.  Different ways of watering.  There are always easy options for dealing with things but that does not mean that they are the best and only way. Right now it just looks as though you are choosing the easiest option for the sake of it and deliberately ignoring everything else.  It is very noticeable how you are cherry picking the bits out of the Reuters report to suit your agenda. We should be erring on the side of safety and there are plenty of other research papers on the subject.  That is why it has not been authorised for continual use in the EU and its use has been reviewed and re-reviewed again and again. Big companies have a reputation for heavily lobbying for their products to be used.

Philippa Bond ● 597d

Good to quote the actual ruling to avoid misleading people. It did not find that Glyphosate caused cancer. The "linked to cancer" is not part of the ruling, but added by the journalist. Ruling below.The claims it was sued  for were that Glyphosate "won't harm anything but weeds" and "do not pose a threat to the health of animal wildlife," as well as suggestions in since-removed YouTube videos that Roundup was safer than detergent and soap." Cancer is the scare usually claimed, although the governments agency on safety, the HSE, says it is safe and efficacious."Guy, sounds like you aren't a gardener or knowledgable about plants. No reason you should be, but good if making decisions to get advice. Why not speak to some of your colleagues in GS, who actually maintain green spaces. Mechanical removal which includes hoeing or applying strong, hazardous acids or steam or boiling water that are a burns risk, don't kill the roots of perennials. Glyphosate does. So perennial weeds and trees keep growing, the roots getting bigger each year. If weather is wet, the regrowth will be very quick.If the council has additionl resources to use managing the area, would you prefer it used them ineffectively hoeing out weeds, or planting and maintaining flower beds, troughs and hanging baskets. Creating and maintaining wildflower meadows. Making the area beautiful, more bio diverse and uplifting to be in. NEW YORK, June 15 (Reuters) - Bayer AG (BAYGn.DE) agreed on Thursday to pay $6.9 million to settle claims by New York Attorney General Letitia James that it misled consumers by advertising Roundup weedkiller, which has been linked to cancer, as environmentally safe.The settlement resolves accusations that Bayer and its Monsanto unit failed to substantiate their repeated claims about Roundup products containing the active ingredient glyphosate.These included that Roundup "won't harm anything but weeds" and "do not pose a threat to the health of animal wildlife," as well as suggestions in since-removed YouTube videos that Roundup was safer than detergent and soap.James said the claims violated state laws against false and misleading advertising, and breached Monsanto's 1996 settlement with New York over its advertising of Roundup at the time.

Kathleen Healy ● 597d

Weed-free streets, Guy, that's all we want - and have a right to ask for. Let's hope there's enough money in the pot to adequately fund all this gardening!

Bruce Hammal ● 597d

There are some operatives - 2 teams I think - who are dedicated to dealing with addressing such problems. And yes, weeds will grow again, even if poisoned, but less frequently. Bees, butterflies and humans have a better chance

Guy Lambert ● 597d

Credit where it's due. I reported the heavy weed infestation on my road using the Fix My Street app on Sept 6. Last week a team of gents with their hoes and brooms arrived and did a pretty good job given how much there was to do. Sadly of course the relief is only temporary since the roots will live on, but it's a great improvement while it lasts. How individual complaints are addressed alongside the planned schedule for weed-clearing I don't know but for anyone else with a pavement jungle they'd rather not have, the moral is, if you don't ask you might not get.

Bruce Hammal ● 597d

Well she was Minister for Water...  and Minister for Health... and holding neither of those jobs gave much confidence.Monsanto now Bayer appear to have lost another court case:https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/bayer-reaches-69-mln-settlement-with-new-york-over-roundup-safety-claims-2023-06-15/#:~:text=NEW%20YORK%2C%20June%2015%20(Reuters,to%20cancer%2C%20as%20environmentally%20safe.There will of course be an awful lot of lobbying going on in Europe right now.I still think we should be looking for alternatives. 

Philippa Bond ● 599d

Environment secretary Coffey says Glyphosate is safe to use. If she says so, we can take it that it IS dangerous

Iris Hill ● 603d

It's definitely a murky tale.  Land is under pressure everywhere and we will lose a lot more if we aren't careful with it being used for the associated facilities that aren't being provided to go with the denser housing that is springing up and much of which is not affordable.There is talk of a lido being proposed on Perivale Golf Course.It is however uplifting to see that it would be possible to create a more accessible rail bridge by the Strand on the Green school and extremely disappointing that Network Rail are trying to avoid doing so by ignoring disability legislation and trying to push through yet another one of their new-but-inaccessible-to-the-many-footbridges without more consultation.

Philippa Bond ● 605d

As an aside, while Hounslow Council have been embracing "rewilding" our pavements, their colleagues in Ealing appear to be set on un-wilding 25 hectares of what is known as Warren Farm Nature Reserve near Osterley Park by selling it off for sports pitches - many of course will be artificial (i.e. plastic).It's a murky tale - told in the current Private Eye - and there are petitions and the usual protests for anyone who wants to have their opinion heard. (Good luck with that.)The Eye article winds up thus."Poor people need football more than they need nature. Discuss."

Bruce Hammal ● 605d

"We have asked them this year to allocate more people to weed management and have subsidised some of this."Sounds a bit half-hearted to me Guy, I would have preferred to read "We have TOLD them to allocate A LOT more people ......and have comitted to meeting the cost of this."When can we look forward to receiving our council-provided hoes and brooms?

Bruce Hammal ● 605d

Guy, HSE says Glyphosate is safe and efficacious. I am glad you are no longer contesting that.  It also, as you quote suggests / endorses its use to prevent trip hazards.Parks for London has created a guide to integrated weed management. It seems a sensible approach and I would urge you to read and consider adopting it. It seems Hammersmith may already have, which is why its streets look better. Hounslow followed Hammersmith into a ban of Glyphosate, perhaps it could now follow it in taking a more pragmatic, holistic approach, looking at all risks and benefits. Thank you for confirming that Hounslow Highways accepted a change to how it was allowed to deliver the contract without imposing any cost increase or requiring a reduction in the service level.

Kathleen Healy ● 605d

What it actually says is "The responsible use of pesticides in amenity areas as part of an integrated programme of control can help deliver substantial benefits for society. These include: management of conservation areas, invasive species and flood risks; access to high quality sporting facilities; and safe public spaces (for example, by preventing weed growth on hard surfaces creating trip hazards), industrial sites and transport infrastructure."That is not the same as saying it is recommend it. We use it sparingly on invasive species but have different means to deal with any trip hazards (we dig the weeds out). Of course some people see a trip hazard whenever they lead the front door and of course some people (me included) do trip inside their own living rooms!Hounslow Highways from time to time have claims for trips and other accidents and they resolve this via their insurance.Because the contract with HH is a PFI it doesn't cost us any  different unless we ask them to increase the service. We have asked them this year to allocate more people to weed management and have subsidised some of this.

Guy Lambert ● 605d

Guy, this is the link to the HSE page on Glyphosate; https://www.hse.gov.uk/pesticides/using-pesticides/general/glyphosate-faqs.htmIt says "All companies wishing to obtain approval for their pesticides are required to submit substantial data dossiers to support their applications. The extensive range of studies undertaken on pesticides is aimed at establishing acceptable safety for people, animals and the wider environment. This process has been applied to glyphosate which has been approved as safe and efficacious for a number of years now."The HSE advice goes on to recommend using Glyphosate to avoid trip hazards on hard surfaces.Perhaps speak to an Officer at the Council responsible for Health & Safety. In ignoring the advice to avoid trip hazards by using glyphosate to keep pavements weed free, the council may be putting itself at risk of being found negligent, if someone tripped and was injured.What was the consequence of changing the contract to stop Hounslow Highways using Glyphosate? Was there an additional cost or reduction in service level? I imagine this is  informatiom must be in the public domain.

Kathleen Healy ● 605d

The EU do not say that, and whilst one of their agencies is saying it can be approved for the long term (currently it can not be used after this 15th December). It is very contentious and for example Germany is strongly against this possible relaxation of the rules.I have no qualifications to judge this. Perhaps you do. I'm surprised that you take the side of multinational chemical companies. As I have said before this seems to me like another of those circumstances where powerful companies are lobbying against changes for safety (smoking, global warming)HSE doesn't say glyphosate is safe but that they have no reason to control it. It's not hard to find evidence of debatable interference with evidence by Monsanto and its associates. I am particularly mindful when I hear "In June 2020 Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, agreed to a $10 billion settlement as a result of a number of class-action lawsuits alleging that Roundup had caused cancer"$10billion is more than small change even for an outfit like Bayer

Guy Lambert ● 606d

Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile.  It’s very clever to save money, not do your job properly and let residents step in to pick up the  slack. Well done Hounslow!

Maggie Dodge ● 606d

Guy, when LBH changed the contract with Hounslow Highways was there a consequence? An increased cost or reduction in service level. If there was, what was the contract change in terms of Hounslow Highways fee or obligations?My interest in the LBH ban is from seeking to improve the bio diversity of Dukes Meadows. Over 20 years Dukes Meadows Trust has planted hundreds of trees thousands of hedge plants and created meadow areas. Summers are getting hotter and dryer and the ground at Dukes Meaows is sandy soil over gravel, very free draining.On Friday after volunteers cut the hedge the Trust planted along Riverside Drive, as we do every year, we watered most of the trees in the avenue of 30 Lime trees we planted in two halves, 4 and 5 years ago. The leaves were yellowing and they were clearly very thirsty. They would probably have survived and just gone into an early autumn, but having planted and looked after them for 5 years, we didnt want to take the risk. It took around two hours to set up the hose water and pack away.A few weeks ago GS cut the long grass that we encourged them to leave on half the field. Unfortunately, a couple of the trees in a copse we planted 10 years ago were strimmed, one quite badly.Removing the grass from around trees greatly increases the water the tree has access to. Grass creates a dense mat of roots that catch rainfall after Spring. Spraying to remove the grass protects the trees from being accidentaly strimmed, ring barked and killed. Anticipating a suggestion, mulching only works if you remove the roots of perennials such as grass first. Anticipating another suggestion, Yellow Rattle is an annual it can't set seed on thick grass and is ineffective against couch grass. It's not a silver bullet against all grass.The long grass area was succesful, but large patches of Foxtail came up. It causes infections and can cause death in dogs, so if not dealt with, I imagine there will be a big push back against leaving long grass areas from concerned dog owners. It's a shame because the free draining soil that makes the ground dry is perfect for meadows.We are all eating Glyophsate because it is extensively used in agriculture, but we can't use it to spray around trees to help them survive and thrive or to manage a grass that is known to be a significant risk to dogs.Athoritative sources like the EU, in its latest assemment and the HSE say Glyphosate is safe. Instead of relying on these sources you cite a website that has inaccurate, out of date information. From a member of the public, that would be regerattable, but you are an LBH cabinet member making decsions about how millions of pounds of public money is spent.

Kathleen Healy ● 606d

https://www.richmond.gov.uk/news/august_2023/battle_litter_along_the_thames_with_2_minute_litter_pick_boardsRichmond Council are amongst many Councils leading the way."Grab a litter picker from the Unitplus a plastic bag ... and do a 2 minute pick!

Jim Lawes ● 606d

I don't think philanthropists ever expected their generosity to go towards such a basic council obligation as keeping streets and pavements in good repair and weed free! What has replaced philanthropy is volunteering which increasingly is relied on to cover inadequacies in provision of services. We see this in the regular litter-picking gatherings in Chiswick. The trouble with this approach is that it becomes the norm and councils gratefully reduce or withdraw from core tasks. Maybe Hounslow should issue free hoes and brooms to residents and let us get on with it - I'm sure Philippa will be at the front of the queue.

Bruce Hammal ● 606d

There is a bigger picture.  Govt controls a lot of what Councils can do and what they can spend or raise.  They have some things they have to provide by law and some they don't..  The philanthropists of the past who paid for the building of hospitals and libraries and schools etc for the people - like many of the ones which Councils now struggle to keep running at great cost - where are they and ehat are they doing with their money now?

Philippa Bond ● 606d

You're quite right, Kathleen, the EU ban was suspended for 12 months (just after the article I cited and just before the ban was expected to be implemented). There is an enormous fight continuing with global chemical giants on one side and environmentalists on the other. To me it is a smaller version of the arguments over the years about smoking being harmful and whether global warming is real, and I'm surprised to see you on the side you are.

Guy Lambert ● 606d

Years of resentment about how Hounslow treats Chiswick must come in to this. Our Council is supposed to serve residents, Chiswick is constantly fighting to be heard and listened to. Cash cow has been a well known term for as long as I can remember. Their inability to take on board consultations is equally notorious now.

Maggie Dodge ● 606d

It is perfectly usual to have some longer contracts.  A lot of problems can be caused by short contracts and lack of continuity.  A cheap price isn't everything if you have to spend more time overseeing and training.

Philippa Bond ● 607d

No Kathleen, we only have glyphosate available because our standards have been lowered following Brexit and an alternative UK bill has been passed allowing it for a longer time.  In the EU it's ONLY been extended to the end of THIS year - one year - instead of the five it was last extended by in the EU (and previous to that it had been 15 years).  There are more and more scientific reports not fewer and fewer questioning the use of this.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9101768/#:~:text=Most%20of%20these%20studies%20show,structure%20of%20the%20nervous%20system.https://wildjustice.org.uk/glyphosate/glyphosate-levels-in-human-urine-preliminary-results/https://www.gardenorganic.org.uk/our-views/glyphosate-the-debate

Philippa Bond ● 607d

That's true Philippa, shop fronts used to be swept and sometimes washeddown or cleared in bad weather also residents used to do the same, peopletook pride in their homes, maybe they are just too busy now or no interestanymore.

Janice Evans ● 607d

Ah! Now I see why "Horatio" managed to cycle though Chiswick recently without seeing any Lime Bikes badly parked.Horatio must have been looking for bees on weeds instead.🤓🐝

Adrian Irving ● 607d

In the cause of accuracy, Glyphosate is a herbicide not a pesticide. If there has been an increase in insect activity it may have something to do with the pavements being full of weeds, and then again it may not. The vast majority of the weeds I see clogging the footpath do not attract insects. If local authorities really want to help support  insect life then they have many opportunities to do so that don't involve letting our streets revert to nature. I'll say it again, councils have a duty to keep the footways free of weeds. If Hounslow Borough  is now asking Hounslow Highways to fulfill their obligation using manual methods then they need to fund accordingly and tell us the cost. I expect to see armies of workers dealing with the problem. Much as they may like to Hounslow just can't do nothing, which seems to be where we are at the moment. I would add that as Guy knows well, weeds grow exceptionally abundantly in footpaths that are worn out and broken, but that's another disappointing story I'm afraid.

Bruce Hammal ● 607d

Guy, you have again quoted an inaccurate report. Glyphosate was not banned in the EU in December 2022, as is stated in the article you posted a link to.We are all familiar with the problem of there being a lot of unreliable information on the internet and the confusion and harm it causes. The advice is to seek authoritative sources of information.You should look at what the Health and Safety Executive HSE, the governments regulator says about it. That should be a credible source for a Local Authority to rely on.All the data related to the EU not banning it is also online, including details about the research.Both the HSE and latest EU studies conclude that Glyphosate does not cause cancer.HSE says; The UK has a rigorous approvals process for pesticides. The main aim of the process is to protect the health of people, creatures and plants and to safeguard the environment.All companies wishing to obtain approval for their pesticides are required to submit substantial data dossiers to support their applications. The extensive range of studies undertaken on pesticides is aimed at establishing acceptable safety for people, animals and the wider environment. This process has been applied to glyphosate which has been approved as safe and efficacious for a number of years now. As for you seeing more bees, great. Why do you think that is because LBH has stopped treating weeds in streets. What research have you do to determine cause and effect?

Kathleen Healy ● 607d

I think John is quite right and I believe the contract was signed by Colin Ellar, who stopped being a councillor in 2018.All this was way before my time as a councillor and I became responsible for the Hounslow Highways contract in 2018.My understanding is that the negotiations of this, which included a heavy involvement of the Department for Transport who allocated some funds to support it probably started a couple of years earlier - John and I think Peter Thompson would know more because they were both on the council at the time and it may have been initiated before 2010 when they were the ruling party. These complex contracts take a long time to negotiate.I am not knocking the contract: it gave Hounslow access to funds for investment which replaced every street lamp in the  borough and gave us an investment in roads and pavements which put us in a position when we were independently assessed as having the best of these in London for several years. This is probably still the situation but the body that used to assess this seems now to have stopped doing it.As to a 25 year contract, it can obviously be inflexible but most people who own houses either have or previously had a 25 year contract, known as a mortgage. It is certainly common in commerce for complex contracts having a long life.As to the decision to stop using Glyphosate, this decision was made by the council. It is of course controversial but where I live I see bees and butterflies which were not seen anything like as often a couple of years ago.There's a useful article here talking about Glyphosate, it's legal control (somewhere) and what's likely to happen in future. https://naturaler.co.uk/is-glyphosate-banned-uk/If you want my opinion, we will not be buying it in the 2030s and why it wasn't banned years earlier.

Guy Lambert ● 607d

The original complaint was about the streets looking scruffy.Using pesticides and herbicides should never be the instant easy tick box solution to anything. There are degrees to any type of action. Cheap and easy but possible carcinogen -v- a bit of hard work?  Who wants their families to be exposed to this?  Just because you don't like something is just not a good enough reason to use something toxic to get rid of it especially with something like glyphosate which has and is being further investigated and regulated and banned in some countries and the effects of which are continually being researched and re-examined. It has been declared as a likely carcinogen and there's plenty of research and findings into its neurotoxic effects.Remember how long it took to find out the truth about tobacco and that non-stick saucepan coating.  We should also all now be aware of the lobbying and secrecy that can surround these products and just err on the side of safety.Do read this (or at least the first page) on the difficulties in regulating:https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/273338/study%20non_disclosure%20DNT%20Mie_Ruden%20s12940-023-00994-9%20(1).pdfSweeping the pavements with a stiff garden brush makes a lot of difference (and makes it more difficult for plants to take root) but when I wrote on here that the only people I had seen doing this were not English I was rounded on.  But it IS true and once upon a time EVERYBODY used to do it! 

Philippa Bond ● 607d

The Hounslow Highways contract was signed on 30 August 2012 and  started on the contract on 1 January 2013.

John Todd ● 607d

Indeed.

Adrian Irving ● 607d

Adrian, it's sadly been that way, with both parties, for a very long time now.

Rae Lewis ● 607d

I’d like to know the answer to who signed a contract for 25 years and why? Presumably Guy would know

Maggie Dodge ● 607d

I agree Rae but what I find most disappointing is it comes as a "revelation" Contrast this against Guy's full page article in Hounslow Matters that spins the reality on it's head.How much better it would have been if the article explained that Hounslow were lumbered with a historic contact and been clear and open about the problems.Unfortunately we now seem to be in an era where spinning the facts is the norm and getting to the real story is made difficult.

Adrian Irving ● 607d

I am horrified by Guy Lambert's revelation: "We are in the middle of changing this approach but it's difficult to implement given that the contract is a 25 year PFI less than 10 years in. Changing it involves terrifying legal costs but we are working closely with H Highways to find a practical adjustment."This sounds a complete disaster for the borough. What bright councillor signed us up for that??

Rae Lewis ● 607d

Every time there’s an environment excuse for not doing something, it’s often connected to saving money. No mow May for example. I’ve only seen one figure quoted,  but apparently Wandsworth saved £1 million by not “mowing”. Leaves money for what the Council are obsessed with maybe.

Maggie Dodge ● 607d

Sorry, do you mean suspicion that LBH+F have quietly gone back to glyphosate??

Rae Lewis ● 607d

Guy, for clarity, who made the decision to stop using weedkiller - was it Hounslow Council or Hounslow Highways? If it was the latter then that would seem to allow a surprising degree of autonomy in altering the spec for the job. If it was the former (the Council) then it seems the terms of the contract do allow for significant variation in the agreement. From Hounslow Highways' point of view they are being asked to keep the streets clear of weeds while having been deprived of the most effective weapon in their armoury, while simultaneously absorbing significantly higher costs in order to fulfill their brief.Not properly thought through would seem to sum this up. Not an unusual situation these days at all levels of government.

Bruce Hammal ● 607d

Guy, if the HSE, the government regulator on health & safety, recommends using Glyphosate to prevent trip hazards on paths, how does LBH justify not using it?

Kathleen Healy ● 607d

In the 'real world' both Conservative and Labour Governments have been signing PFI contracts for similar lengths since the 1990s.  According to Wikipedia the Conservative Government announced it would no longer enter into new PFI contracts in 2018.

Andrew Jones ● 608d

Guy I find it astonishing any team responsible for taxpayer money could sign a contract for 25 years……in the real world this would be deemed incompetent. At least in the contract there should be deliverables and if the service fails to deliver then terminate with zero financial penalties. Then we only have to look at the councils around the country spending our hard earned tax on ridiculous scheme….I rest me case. Councils have a lot to answer for and the ballot box doesn’t seem to be working….

Jayne Thorburn ● 608d

Thanks Philippa - somebody should tell them about Hounslow!I was in Vienna a week ago and was surprised to see there was big weeds in evidence in a country that I always thought they were very strict about not allowing such things. It seems Austria said they would ban, then changed their mind and seem to be vacillating. Of course Vienna is quite a lot at loggerheads with the rest of the country.

Guy Lambert ● 608d

Apologies Kathleen - misnamed you.I had heard a rumour that Hammersmith may have gone back to using Glyphosate but it's just a rumour for me. I'll make another attempt to talk to the lead councillor and get her angle.As Iris says, the arrangement for a few years in Hounslow is to send a team into each ward once a fortnight to do all the roads. This does work for litter (mostly) but not very well for 'detritus' (the gubbins in gutters) and weeds. We are in the middle of changing this approach but it's difficult to implement given that the contract is a 25 year PFI less than 10 years in. Changing it involves terrifying legal costs but we are working closely with H Highways to find a practical adjustment.I often go to wards across the borough and check out how it has worked in wards after their allotted day. I am actually surprised by how well it works. I did look through the 3 Chiswick wards - not comprehensively but by driving around with a colleague looking at the roads we used - early this year and it was OK for litter but patchy for detritus. We also have some council officers who monitor and external assessors also check it once a year.

Guy Lambert ● 608d

https://www.pan-europe.info/press-releases/2022/10/prolonging-eu-glyphosate-authorisation-extra-year-very-bad-news-nature-andThe last renewal of glyphosate in the EU was for ONE YEAR ONLY which is due to end in December 2023 whereas previously it had been renewed for FIVE years instead of the proposed FIFTEEN years.  Doesn't that tell you anything?Some countries in the EU have banned it.  Others are looking to. There are far greater problems caused by vehicles being driven over pavements dislodging kerbstones and crushing paving stones together with many many protruding utility covers and tree roots.  Damage is also often as a result of poor or no making good by builders and contractors.  Why don't more residents make sure their builders and contractors make good properly or complain about other poor workmanship they encounter on the pavements and report it to Fix My Street?Councils across the UK and other other countries ARE trying other methods and glyphosate IS NOT NEEDED in many cases. https://www.pan-uk.org/pesticide-free-towns-success-stories/#:~:text=Peterlee%2C%20Durham%20%E2%80%93%20December%202018%20%E2%80%93,moved%20to%20pesticide%20free%20methods.

Philippa Bond ● 608d

"Has anyone else noticed the trees growing out of the Hogarth flyover. Wonder what a structural engineer would say on the advisability of that?" Yes I have along with a constant stream of overweight vans, and cut cables on ULEZ cameras.

Adrian Irving ● 608d

Hammersmith & Fulham (LBH&F) gave a contract to Idverde in 2022 to manage its land. I have also heard a rumour that they have quietly gone back to a more sensible integrated weed management approach. This involves avoiding using herbicide where there is an alternative, but using it where there isn't. On hard surfaces such as paths and roads etc. Be interested to know if anyone has any more info on that. LBH&F was early in making big statements about banning Glyphosate, so would be interesting to know.Not sure if Guy's comment was aimed at me, as he said  "Katherine". There was no answer on the innacurate press release about Glyphosate having been banned by the EU though, so who knows.Has anyone else noticed the trees growing out of the Hogarth flyover. Wonder what a structural engineer would say on the advisability of that?

Kathleen Healy ● 608d

Thank you Iris. I though Guy was hiding in a fridge, but who could blame him at the moment!I am still a little confused. Does this mean each road in every ward is dealt with every fortnight or there is some sort of rota between wards?

Adrian Irving ● 608d

Guy, it is absolutely vital for Chiswickians with a persecution complex to maintain the fiction that they are the most oppressed people in the world. Conveniently for the local Conservatives this is also critical to their ongoing viability as a Party in the east of the Borough. Of course if Chiswick seceded from Hounslow and embraced Hammersmith it would only be a very short matter of time before the same people rekindled the narrative and became the victims of a capricious Labour Council neglecting the most oppressed people in the far west of the Borough.

Paul Campbell ● 608d

As Guy has missed your question Adrian, the answer is that litter pickers visit the ward (eg Riverside, Turnham Green etc) every fortnight (schedule on the HHighways web site). Low level weeding is the kind of weeds you and I would find easy to pull up. Still a mammoth task and they don't have time. They are supposed to brush up bits of debris and don't. I have been shouting at HHighways for three years about this lack of sweeping  debris and gutters and got nowhere - even when I pointed out that the debris not cleared from gutters is wonderful mulch for the weeds to grow in. The problem is that glyphosate is no longer permitted. So HHighways say quite reasonably that since LBH have decided this then extra money needs to be given to them to do the job. But even though they have, hoing is slow and does not necessarily last that long as the weeds are cut off at ground level and the roots produce more foliage. There is some suspicion I believe that LBH have quietly gone back to glyphosate but who knows. It does seem strange that their streets are so good when surrounding boroughs are full of weeds.

Iris Hill ● 608d

Katherine's argument that we shouldn't worry about the streets is a bit akin to the argument we shouldn't worry about global warming because other countries are worse.Guy I've read Kathleen's post, and I cannot find the argument you mention located in it.Is it the fact that Kathleen has a better brain than yours when it comes to looking after the environment.I don't have to list her achievements as you already know them.I know who I would trust with looking after the boroughs open spaces, and its not you or LBH.

Bernard Allen ● 608d

My question is what do we need to do collectively in W4 to produce a result from our council? An online petition and pounding pavements to scoop up a signature from every home Chiswick? A collective decision to withhold council tax until an agreement is reached? Whatever it is, I am willing to participate, spearhead, etc as the pavements on our street have become genuinely dangerous and borderline impassable.

Jenn Irvine ● 608d

The old story about "Chiswick should be part of Hammersmith" has been floating around on this forum when I first posted here - nearly 20 years ago I think!Council borders are set by the government and are (I believe) based on a theory that they should be roughly the same size, though outer boroughs have more area. Whatever, they haven't changed since I think 1964 so I wouldn't recommend holding your breath. Of course. there are arguments for a different arrangement but I'd say there is little demand for it - never seen it mentioned except here about one every 6 months - and changing would be very expensive.I don't know why Hounslow's grant has been more hit than others I'm no expert and a lot of this happened many years ago - it has to do with government assessment of needs and they tend to believe (when it's a Conservative 'government') that cities, particularly relative poor areas like Hounslow have less need than prosperous shires. Don't forget we had George Osborne starting austerity, largely focused on local authorities and more recently we have levelling down is the B Johnson mantra. And city councils, especially in London, have a high probability to not be Conservative!Katherine's argument that we shouldn't worry about the streets is a bit akin to the argument we shouldn't worry about global warming because other countries are worse.Paul's analysis may be connected to this link https://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2010/13/ (See Isleworth result)

Guy Lambert ● 608d

I absolutely concur with your suggestion about redistribution, Adrian. Since the inception of LBH, I have wondered why my neighbourhood is administratively part of a place I never visit from one year to the next, and whose rulers seem to have little or no concern for the interests of the residents of the eastern end of the borough, apart from their usefulness as a source of revenue.

Colin Jordan ● 608d

Guy you raise an interesting question regarding the comparative sizes between Hounslow and Hammersmith being about one quarter of Hounslow.The question is, is Hounslow to big to manage effectively and wouldn't it better to redistribute a portion to the east over to Hammersmith?Still waiting for answers to my earlier questions btw.

Adrian Irving ● 608d

I'm sure that wouldn't have been the justification given.

Andrew Jones ● 609d

I absolutely concur with Kathleen. Councils have a statutory responsibility to keep footpaths clear of weeds. This applies even when the job has been subcontracted as is the case in Hounslow. Let me say again, since some people don't appear able to grasp this, we are referring to pavements, not areas suitable for rewilding or other semi-cultivated areas of land.  If a council chooses to discontinue using glyphosate, a legal and effective herbicide, then the local authority has a duty to provide an equally effective alternative. Hounslow Highways (the subcontractor) have apparently chosen to employ workers with hoes. If this route is chosen long-term then I'm afraid that Guy's foraging parties will need to be upgraded to armies, toiling day and night to keep the unwanted vegetation in check, since without destroying the roots, the weeds will just come right back. As to the alternative treatments referenced in the OP's outdated cut-and-paste, I can attest that having lived in Hammersmith & Fulham while these methods were in use, their effect was close to nil. I don't know what LBH&F are doing now but it's probably street-cleaners with hoes, though no doubt in greater numbers and with a higher frequency than Hounslow Highways seem prepared to pay for. Meanwhile am happy to report that in my street there are no weeds sprouting outside my house (or those of my immediate neighbours for that matter) as I was out yesterday keeping things in check. It's really not that difficult, if you know how.

Bruce Hammal ● 609d

If we are eating food sprayed with Glyphosate, so it is in the urine of 80% of people, why are we nervous of spraying it on paths on roads?Guy, you may recall, that when the council issued a press release saying that the EU had banned Glyphosate I emailed copying you in and pointing out that that was incorrect. The error was acknowledged, but when I suggested that a clarifying press statement was issued, to avoid creating a misleading impression, that wasn't done.There are many environmental challenges and funding challenges for Local Authorities. Our best hope of addressing them and enhancing parks for bio diversity and beauty is on the basis of science and evidence. The HSE is the government advisor on Health & Safety it advises using Glyphosate on paths to prevent trip hazards. If council's go against this advice and people are injured, where does that leave the council? A fall for an elderly person can be an ultimately fatal expereince. The ban wasn't thought through. There is no alternative to kill perennial weeds that isn't hugely and unfeasibly labour intensive. If removing perennial weeds from between paving, you'd have to lift the paving stones.I beleive part of the rationale was that a company would invest to develop a new "safe" weedkiller. Why would anyone do that? Glyphosate is 60 years old and there isn't evidence that it is a risk to people or animals, if used as advised. Any new weedkiller, would be a "chemical" and would have the added risk of being new and untested over a long period. If just calling something a chemical is enough to get it banned without evidence, why would any company risk the R&D to develop something?What is being proposed as "safe" alternatives are strong acestic acid solutions, whih are a chemical and a risk to health as they burn skin and eyes and can cause lung inflamation, or hot steam, which is also a burns risk. Neither will kill perennial weeds.

Kathleen Healy ● 609d

Guy, in your article you have a heading, WARD BASED STREET CLEANSE, which goes on to say there is a routine fortnightly street cleanse which includes low level wedding in the summer months.Two questions.What Does Ward Based mean?What is low level weeding?Thank's in advance.

Adrian Irving ● 609d

Because Hounslow Labour cannot be trusted to spend our money wisely

Paul Fisher ● 609d

"The solution is resource, and resource is in extreme pressure, especially in Hounslow where our government grants have been more heavily reduced than they were in most other boroughs (don't have the data to hand)"This begs the question, why? What was the justification?

Andrew Jones ● 609d

This story is 6 years old and although our officers are in contact with H&F officers I have tried and failed so far to talk to the lead member in H&F.I agree H&F are doing better on weeds and this is something I spend a lot of time and energy on. H&F have the advantage of having about half as much road mileage as we do and about 1/4 of the area. We had a bad experience with weeds last year and have significantly increased the team this year, some thing which we are looking to continue increasing.The methods used by H&F have all been tried by our contractor, Hounslow Highways, and they have found their approaches have little impact on the problem. The solution is resource, and resource is in extreme pressure, especially in Hounslow where our government grants have been more heavily reduced than they were in most other boroughs (don't have the data to hand)Yesterday I was out in Hanworth and Cranford looking at the works of two teams - one of 4 and one of 9 people working away with hoes, brushes and other manual tools on maybe the hottest day of the year so far. I asked the team leader if he thought he had the best tools for the job, He was clear that he had.We will continue working on this. We know there is more to do and we're committed to improve the weed management.

Guy Lambert ● 609d

Rae, maybe Guy Lambert, a regular reader of this site, would like comment as cabinet member for Highways.According to his full page article on page 27 of Hounslow Matters Hounslow have implemented an "IMPROVED WEED REMOVAL PROGRAMME" SUb-titled with the strap line;"YOU ASKED, WE LISTENDED"

Adrian Irving ● 609d