THE Tories have signalled they will abandon clean air policies as Rishi Sunak claimed he was “on the side” of drivers.

The Prime Minister claimed today that Labour had become “anti-motorist” as he caved into MPs on the right of his party and ordered a review of the rollout of low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs).

They allow local councils to limit traffic in town and city centres by preventing drivers from using quiet residential roads as through routes, encouraging sustainable transport.

Backbenchers have become increasingly critical of the measures despite scientific studies backing their road safety, health and air quality benefits. 

Announcing the review in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Sunak said: “The vast majority of people in the country use their cars to get around and are dependent on their cars. 

“I just want to make sure people know that I’m on their side in supporting them to use their cars to do all the things that matter to them.”

His intervention is despite air pollution being the single largest environmental risk to public health, linked to between 28,000 and 36,000 UK deaths a year, according to data from Public Health England.

The cost to the NHS and social care of air pollutants estimated to be £1.6 billion between 2017 and 2025.

But the party’s narrow electoral victory in Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election over opposition to expansion to the Ulez daily green driving charge appears to have prompted the Conservatives to water down popular green policies.

More than 40 Conservative MPs and peers, including prominent figures such as Lord Frost and Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, have recently written to Mr Sunak urging him to reconsider the deadline for the 2030 ban on new petrol and diesel car sales.

While he ruled out any shift in the government’s position on the ban, he was accused of “pure hypocrisy” by shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh over his U-turn on LTNs.

She said: “The Conservatives accelerated and funded the use of LTNs, so it is pure hypocrisy to see them denounce a policy they have been instrumental in introducing and accelerating at pace.

“Measures to improve road safety around schools and in residential streets are often demanded by local communities themselves.

“That’s why these are decisions for local authorities and must be done with proper consultation and taking on board the concerns of communities.”

Council leaders suggested today the “unnecessary” review was undemocratic.

The Local Government Association’s transport spokeswoman Linda Taylor said: “It is councils who are best placed to make decisions with their communities in improving the lives of people and businesses.

“As democratic organisations they continually review all kinds of services and schemes based on local circumstances. Therefore, a national review is unnecessary.”

Greenpeace’s UK chief scientist Doug Parr criticised the “sad descent of Conservatives into electoral culture war tactics on environmental issues.”

Researchers from Imperial College London last November said they had “effectively disproved” critics’ claims that LTNs increase traffic and pollution in surrounding areas.

Finding instead that LTNs reduce traffic and air pollution without displacing the problem to nearby streets, Dr Audrey de Nazelle said: “This research effectively disproves the argument that low-traffic zones will necessarily cause an increase in traffic and air pollution in neighbouring streets.”

Another report by the university found “walking, cycling and driving all became approximately three to four times safer per trip.”

“Our findings suggest that low-traffic neighbourhoods reduce injury risks across all modes inside the neighbourhood, without negative impacts at the boundary.”

Dr Camilla Kingdon, the president of the Royal Society of Paediatrics and Child Health, said: “Action is needed in the form of clean air schemes as seen in some UK cities and nationwide, as well as clear air quality targets. At the end of the day, this is a child’s rights issue, and our children need to remain at the heart of these policies.”

A new parliamentary report has meanwhile found government plans to drastically scale up nuclear capacity are more of a “wish list,” with the role of “Great British Nuclear” still ambiguous.

The science, innovation and technology committee said questions remain for ministers’ ambitious nuclear goals, with doubts over whether the government has a specific strategy to meet the target of bolstering Britain’s nuclear capacity to 24 gigawatts of electricity by 2050.