Dirty Air, Green Silence: Folkestone & Hythe’s PM2.5 Failure

Air pollution has one great political advantage: you usually can’t see it. That makes it perfect for committees, strategies, action plans, warm words and glossy promises. Unfortunately, residents don’t breathe “strategic objectives”. They breathe air. And according to the Healthy Air Coalition’s “Hidden in Plain Sight” campaign, Folkestone and Hythe’s estimated PM2.5 level is 8 μg/m³, above the World Health Organization guideline of 5 μg/m³. Nationally, the coalition says 98.7% of people in England live in areas above that WHO guideline.

The old excuse that bad air is just a city problem has gone up the chimney. The coalition’s analysis says rural and semi-rural areas can have pollution levels comparable with major urban areas. So no, this isn’t only about London buses, Birmingham traffic or diesel fumes in big-city canyons. It’s about ordinary streets, ordinary lungs and ordinary councils deciding whether “clean air” is a policy or a poster.

That matters here because Folkestone & Hythe District Council is a Green-led council. Cllr Stephen Scoffham – pictured – is a Green councillor and the Cabinet member responsible for climate and environment and air quality. In other words, if clean air isn’t his problem, we may as well appoint the chimney sweep as Director of Public Health.

The national Green Party position only sharpens the local contradiction. The Local Government Association’s summary of the Green manifesto says elected Greens would “push for a Clean Air Act” and “enshrine the right to breathe clean air in the law.” Splendid. But rights are supposed to survive contact with the district boundary. If clean air is a legal right in a manifesto, it cannot become a vague aspiration somewhere between Hythe High Street, Black Bull Road and the next scrutiny meeting.

FHDC’s Corporate Plan says it is a “blueprint for our towns, villages and communities for the next five years”. It promises to improve “people’s well-being and the health of the environment”. The health section talks about improving “people’s health, wellbeing and safety” and supporting walking, cycling and public transport. All very nice. But a blueprint is not a lung, and a cyclist still needs breathable air.

The environment section promises “clean and welcoming” streets and green spaces, climate action, better recycling, protection for the countryside, biodiversity and water. Again, fine words. But clean air is oddly elusive in the hard machinery of local delivery. It floats around the plan like incense at a council retreat: fragrant, reassuring and not especially measurable.

Now compare that with the council’s air-quality reports. From 2020 onwards, FHDC’s Annual Status Reports show the same awkward truth: the council monitors nitrogen dioxide, but it does not directly monitor PM2.5 or PM10. The 2025 report says, bluntly: “Concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 were not monitored in Folkestone and Hythe in 2024.” That is not a minor footnote. That is the pollutant at the heart of the national public-health warning.

Yes, the council can say its nitrogen dioxide levels are below the legal objective. The 2025 report records a maximum NO2 concentration of 19.3 μg/m³ at Black Bull Road, below the 40 μg/m³ objective. But that is not the same as proving the air is healthy. It is the municipal equivalent of weighing the dog and declaring the cat fit.

The PM2.5 issue is where the comfort blanket starts smouldering. The council’s 2025 report says the maximum predicted PM2.5 background concentration in 2024 was 7.3 μg/m³. That may sit below the current legal target, but it is still above the WHO guideline of 5 μg/m³ highlighted by the Healthy Air Coalition. “Legal” and “safe” are not the same word, however many times officialdom tries to slip them into the same cardigan.

Then there is smoke. FHDC’s 2025 report says there are currently no Smoke Control Areas in Folkestone & Hythe. It says the council received 129 smoke complaints in 2024, although that figure was “not definitive due to logging inaccuracies and duplicates”. It also says there were no formal notices served for smoke across the district that year. So we have complaints, no Smoke Control Areas, no formal notices, and a data system apparently wheezing like an old stove.

ShepwayVox has already been warning about this. It has highlighted the district’s lack of direct PM2.5 and PM10 monitoring, the absence of Smoke Control Areas, and the wood-burner issue, especially in Hythe. When Cllr Scoffham reportedly described UCL-linked wood-burner mapping as “very crude”, he may have had a fair technical point about proxy data. But pointing at the thermometer and saying it is not a hospital-grade device does not make the fever disappear.

Cllr Scoffham has also been quoted by the council saying the district should have “clean, green streets free from pollution, litter and plastic”, and that the carbon plan should not become “a strategy that just gathers dust on the shelf”. Good. Then let’s apply the same test to air quality. A clean-air promise that does not monitor PM2.5, does not review Smoke Control Areas, and does not publish clear enforcement outcomes is not leadership. It is dust with a recycled cover page.

So what should Cllr Scoffham do? First, publish a proper clean-air action update. Not a fog machine of “partnership working” and “ongoing engagement”, but a clear plan with named actions, deadlines and public reporting. FHDC’s Corporate Plan says progress will be reported every six months. Good. Start with PM2.5 and PM10 monitoring. Put sensors where people actually live, walk, shop, queue for school, sit in traffic and smell smoke.

Second, review Smoke Control Areas, starting with places where complaints, housing density, valley/topography effects, wood-burning prevalence and vulnerable residents make the risk most obvious. This needn’t be a war on people trying to keep warm. It should be a public-health exercise based on evidence, fairness and enforcement. But doing nothing because it is administratively easier is not compassion. It is cowardice with a committee timetable.

Third, publish a plain-English smoke and air-quality dashboard: complaints, repeat locations, investigations, warnings, abatement notices, Community Protection Warnings, Community Protection Notices, prosecutions and outcomes. If the 129 smoke-complaint figure is unreliable because of duplicates and logging problems, fix the logging. Dirty air does not become cleaner because the spreadsheet has had a nervous breakdown.

Fourth, use planning policy properly. The Corporate Plan talks about high-quality developments, walking, cycling, public transport and environmental protection. That should mean tougher scrutiny of heating systems, construction dust, school routes, traffic growth, freight impacts and car dependency. Clean air has to be designed into places, not stapled on afterwards like a consultation leaflet nobody asked for.

The issue is now credibility. Greens cannot campaign nationally for a Clean Air Act while locally presiding over a system that estimates PM2.5, doesn’t directly monitor it, has no Smoke Control Areas, records smoke complaints, serves no formal smoke notices and then invites residents to admire the Corporate Plan. That is not environmental politics. That is branding with a bronchial cough.

Cllr Scoffham has a simple choice. He can treat the Healthy Air Coalition’s warning as another national report to be “noted”, filed and forgotten. Or he can act like the Cabinet member responsible for the environment in a Green-led council. Monitor the particles. Publish the strategy. Review Smoke Control Areas. Fix the complaints data. Use planning powers. Report progress publicly. Show residents that “clean air” is not just something Greens say when someone hands them a rosette.

Clean air cannot be a Green Party slogan nationally and a Folkestone & Hythe blind spot locally. If the right to breathe clean air is good enough for the manifesto, it is good enough for Hythe, Folkestone, Cheriton, Sandgate, New Romney and every smoky winter street in the district. Anything less is not environmental leadership. It is hot air — and not the clean kind.

The Shepway Vox Team

Not Owned By Hedgefunds, Barons and Billionaires