They are killing us with pollution. They are killing us by allowing the car to run rampant.

They are flogging our pavements and our eyeballs and our attention.

They spout nonsense about clean and green and how they are “carbon literate” and …

Oh, you know all this. You get punched in the face by it every day.

Here’s the latest from Steady State Manchester, on electronic billboards, their energy consumption and “Jevons’ Paradox.”

I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to our lords and masters at the Council back in December 2021 and finally got answers to in February and hadn’t been bothered to put on line. Here’s the previous post about this topic.

Read it and weep.

1. Was there any minuted discussion within The City Council – between officers, between officers and Executive Members, between Executive Members – of the any legal liability arising from what is advertised on the displays, as per the December 17th tweet by Chris. If so, please provide copies of those discussions/discussion documents
Officers discussed the parameters of what would be displayed on the CIP units at the Overview and Scrutiny Ethical Procurement Sub Committee on Thursday 21st February 2019 the minutes for this meeting are available on the council website

2. Was there any minuted discussion (same groups) of the morality, aside from legal responsibility, of encouraging further consumption/consumerism during a climate emergency? If so, please provide copies of those discussions/discussion documents
As above.

3. During the negotiations with JC Decaux, did the Council propose to have any veto over what could be displayed? If so,
a) please provide a copy of what MCC proposed and
The specification stated that all advertising must comply with the code of practice of the Advertising standards authority, in addition to this the following conditions were included:

a. not infringe on any trademark, copyright or patent rights of another company;

b. not relate to films which have not been granted permission for public exhibition or which do not show the British Board of Film Classification certificate;

c. not be in advocacy of, or opposition to any politically, environmentally or socially controversial subjects or issues;

d. not relate to a political party or parties or a political cause/not refer to indecency or obscenity or use obscene or distasteful language;

f. not depict direct or immediate violence to anyone shown in the advertisement;

g. not depict men, women or children in a sexual manner or displays nude or semi-nude figures in an overtly sexual context;

h. not promote the availability of adult or sexually orientated entertainment materials or establishments;

i. not promote food or beverage products that are classed ‘less healthy’ based on the Food Standards Agency ‘Nutrient Profiling Model’

j. not promote tobacco products and e-cigarettes or related products

k. not promote weapons, gambling or illegal drugs;

l. not promote financial organisations and loan advancers with punitive interest rates, ‘cash for gold’ or similar pawn broker type agents;

m. not contain negative references to Manchester City Council Services or those services provided or regulated by the Authority, or organisations associated with the Authority

n. not adversely affect in any way the interests of the site owner

b) what was JC Decaux’s response? (just summarise it, since that reply is probably covered by commercial confidentiality, innit?
JCDecaux agreed the above terms

4. When is the contract up for renewal?
The contract is for 10 years with an option to extend up to 5 years. The contract Start date is 1 August 2021

5. Is further pollution of public space to be scrutinised by any scrutiny committee, ever? If so, which one will it be?
Nothing is scheduled at this time

6. Oh, and what risk assessments were conducted about distracting drivers, further light pollution for wild life and cluttering pavements to the detriment of the mobility of pedestrians and wheelchair users? Please provide copies.
All sites were assessed based on the visual amenity and Highways safety as part of the planning approval, each site was approved on this basis. Therefore, no individual risk assessments were undertaken