Residents on a Brighton council estate have said that they do not want the herbicide glyphosate used in their area.
Barney Miller, chair of the Sylvan Hall Residents’ Association, shared his neighbours’ concerns about weedkiller being used on the estate in Roundhill.
At a Brighton and Hove City Council housing management panel meeting, where council tenants and leaseholders discuss issues with housing officers and councillors, Mr Miller said that Sylvan Hall residents did not want the “carcinogenic” chemical used there.
He told the meeting on Tuesday (19 March): “The tenants and residents’ association is completely unhappy with the idea of using carcinogenic stuff to remove weeds. They don’t like the idea of putting it on the pavements.”
Green councillor Pete West, who represents Roundhill, said that the Labour manifesto for the local elections last May said: “We will not return to the use of harmful glyphosate.”
Councillor West said: “There’s been a lot of criticism over the last few years of the previous administration’s handling of this matter but it was the Labour Party that ended the use of glyphosate in the first place which was laudable.
“It wasn’t well considered and we had the pandemic which made sourcing equipment and financing costs and getting enough labour together to act upon it very difficult.”
Mitch Watkinson, vice-chair of the Bates Estate Community Association, said that the council was in a difficult position as weed growth was “a massive problem”.
He said: “We’re stuck between a rock and a hard place. The weed problem is a massive problem, causing slips, trips and falls. They were looking for alternatives.
“The problem you’ve got is: do you want the weeds clearing or don’t you? It sounds like the council is not going to do something irresponsible. It’s obviously been risk assessed. You need to make the decision.”
The council’s City Environment, South Downs and the Sea Committee voted in January to use a “controlled droplet” approach with the herbicide – sold commercially as Roundup – applying it to individual weeds rather than spraying it as previously.
Labour councillor Tobias Sheard told the housing management panel that the council had looked for other ways to bring weeds under control.
Councillor Sheard said: “We didn’t want to go back to just spraying which is why we’ve chosen to use the ‘controlled droplet’ approach.
“I understand there’s a long of strong feelings on this and I’ve got strong feelings. Everyone’s got strong feelings. No one wants to be using glyphosate but we are caught between a rock and a hard place.”
He said that in roads that were clear of weeds or where communities were “adverse” to the idea of using glyphosate, the options could include setting up weeding groups with tools supplied by the council.
The return of glyphosate comes five years after councillors of all political colours backed the Pesticide Action Network’s (PAN) campaign to ban the weedkiller.
But since the council stopped using it, weeds have built up on the pavements, causing damage and injuring people and pets.
Maybe residents should be given the opportunity to pay a council tax surcharge for the option of having weeds removed manually. Or, I suppose they could do it themselves. I believe that in many other countries it is regarded as good manners to keep the areas in front of your house free of weeds.
When I get my small , but easily overgrown front garden under control, it takes maybe 10 minutes extra to weed the pavement in front. If everyone who doesn’t want the ‘nuclear’ option did their little bit there wouldn’t be a problem. [But people do like to bitch about……stuff.]
What about the people that can’t do it or don’t have time? Have you considered all of them? Some people live in blocks of flats and have a large area around them. And besides council tax is paid for services. If it wasn’t allowed to get so bad under the greens there wouldn’t be such a problem now.
Proving David’s point, just in time .
Who let Pete West out of the secure unit?
“Barney Miller, chair of the Sylvan Hall Residents’ Association, shared his neighbours’ concerns about weedkiller being used”
How many neighbours are expressing their concerns? 2, 5,10 ?
All I see here is one person expressing their concerns…
Just over 50 people complained about the weeds to the council. Only one person received £200.00 compensation for an injury cause by the over grown weeds. The other case for compensation was denied by the council no payment was made. Not a large number of people either.
To put this in perspective the council have £60,000 of claims made by drivers for damage to their cars from pot holes. There does not seem a plan to remedy this, even a EU backed safety claimed plan. yet the weed have to go even if it causes a Heath risk to residents and wild life or the council risk be in the national media again this summer.
Really.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), classified glyphosate in Group 2A, “probably carcinogenic to humans” in 2015. In 2017, California environmental regulators listed glyphosate as “known to the state to cause cancer.”
And yet the EU deem it as safe. There appears to be conflicting scientific evidence.
But California has removed the warning from products containing Glyphosate, and is still legal to buy and use in the USA.
So Barney Miller an ex Green Party candidate, (all looks pretty co ordinated with Cllr West chirping up), is opposed to the weedkiller. How many local residents is he actually speaking for? Has there been a vote?
When I get my small , but easily overgrown front garden under control, it takes maybe 10 minutes extra to weed the pavement in front. If everyone who doesn’t want the ‘nuclear’ option did their little bit there wouldn’t be a problem. [But people do like to bitch about……stuff.]
OK, clearing the pavement in front of your house is easy, but what about all the pavements abd footpaths that are not near houses? They are still trip hazards.
I sense you’re getting caught up in details; at the heart of David’s message is the idea that a small additional effort could yield significant reductions in the problem. With this lighter workload, wouldn’t it be easier for council workers to extend their services to those more distant areas?
You make a great point David. By collectively doing a little bit more than just our own patches, we could reduce this issue substantially. Makes no difference if it’s directly outside, or down the road. Every little bit helps. Many hands, light work, as they say!
Easy : as the council will only spot spray weeds, Barney and Pete can just remove them manually, and there won’t be any spraying.
Considering the original ban was instigated by the Greens who helped local activists at Brighton based Pesticide Action Network UK spread scaremongering misinformation it’s not surprising they are still supporting each other to save face.
It was labour administration that brought in the ban not green
Maybe some of the individuals, who are lazy, and do nothing on a daily basis. Get a spade and fork, and work to clear our pavement’s. 🙄😖😳😤😩🤬
Whilst they live there and the council does take input from tennants it’s not ‘their estate’ to decide everything on.
If they don’t want the weedkiller to be used then work with the council and agree to take the weeding over – the council could provide the tools (though you can buy gloves and a weed cutter pretty cheaply heck even a paint scraper will work) – just as they have provided equipment and training to local groups to remove grafitti.
And if there are no weeds on the pavement then there won’t be any spraying.
Spray it at night, the will never know the difference
Why don’t the council give residents the tools to do their own weeding? I always get dog dirt on my hands when I weed the street, and proper tools would avoid that. Councillor Pete West is wonderful, treasure him and all the Green Party councillors we have left, they are the only ones willing to stand up against this.
They have funds to literally do this. Estate Development Bid, takes about half an hour to put together a bid proposal up to £1,000. More than enough to cover a whole pile of tools for a green focused group!
Wear gloves then!
Marigolds would protect your hands or even just latex gloves
Pete West is useless. When I lived in the North Laine he did very little to resolve issues – same with his colleagues.
I thought that these processes were decided at council elections by voting for the people that best represented your own personal views. That is what I understood democracy to mean.
The Greens got dismissed because of so many lies and terrible management of the city, and now we have someone else.
That’s how democracy works, isn’t it?
I know Green voters have a very hard time understanding democracy and think that just shouting and attacking everyone is sufficient to get their own way, but this council has a different policy and they won the latest council elections and are currently in charge. Suck it up.
Its legal, spray it,,, and who ever gets in the way, clown heads moaning seem to forget spending time and money arguing for going nowhere means less being spent on the actual problem. SPRAY IT
Omd it’s bloody banned ffs
And it’s toxic to the wildlife like foxes and birds and insects etc.
The council has neglected Brighton
Let’s see Labour being kinder to the planet than the filthy toilet tories
It’s not banned you or I could buy it in a garden centre tomorrowin the UK or anywhere else in the EU
Salt kills weeds!
And won’t kill you!
I’ve heard boiling water does a fair job of it too.
Many swear by vinegar mixed with salt. A small amount of washing up liquid can optionally be added to make it stick better.