MAUK 2 Proposals for Planning Minister
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
MAST ACTION UK
Two Propositions for the New Telecommunications Planning Minister Meg Munn and Her departmental advisory Team
1. Full Planning for all Ground Based Masts subject to time limits now along the lines recommended by the Welsh Assembly unanimously by 41 votes to nil against
2. Stewart Report May 2000 Paragraph 1.31
"Adverse impacts on the local environment may already impact on the public's well-being as much as any direct health effects"
See attached Memorandum presented to the EMF Discussion Group of the Health Protection Agency on Monday 16 October 2006.
Proposition 1
At the final meeting of the ODPM Steering Group with the appointed Consultants ARUP on the future of Telecoms Network Rollouts an issue raised by the Planning Inspectorate was brought to the Steering Group members attention as follows:-
The Planning Inspectorate has expressed a view that "smaller antennas should clearly be permitted development" and should not require prior approval....
..."The aim should be to take as much minor telecommunications development as possible out of the planning control system altogether" (Direct correspondence from Simon Farmer, Head of Policy PINS).
The representatives from both the Local Planning Authorities and the Network Operators after a 20-minute discussion agreed firstly it would be necessary to define what was meant by "smaller antennas" and secondly this was an impractical suggestion. However to be constructive there was a consensus that (1) Prior Approval should be abolished and (2) replaced by a requirement for full planning for all Ground Based Masts, Antenna and Equipment cabins, subject to a ‘deemed approval' if no decision was taken within 56 days, plus an additional 7 days within which to provide the required written notification of the decision taken within the 56 day period. - See conflict of wording between PPG8 and its Annex and the wording in Annex 1 which fails to include notification "in writing" in its confused wording.
From Mast Action UK's members viewpoint the Planning Inspectorate suggestion totally ignores the requirement of Local Democratic decisions and comes from an Inspectorate which appears to believe local democracy and its decisions are not of any real importance, and ignores completely vital possible adverse health effects and concerns despite a number of Planning Inspectors having accepted that these are material considerations which lawfully have to be taken into account.
Proposition 2
At the inaugural meeting of the EMF Discussion Group in March 2006 chaired by Sir William Stewart the Chairman of the Health Protection Agency the Question of Stress induced ill-health was canvassed, and at its 16 October 2006 meeting the Health Protection Agency considered evidence since May 2000 relating to paragraph 1.31 of the Stewart Report showing that for an element of the UK population Prolonged Stress induced by the ‘over close proximity' of mobile phone Masts and Base Stations can actually medically achieve the environmental adverse impacts feared by the independent experts when writing the original May 2000 Stewart Report, whose main recommendations were repeated and confirmed by the subsequent NRPB Mobile Phones and Health 2004 Report.
As the Health Protection Agency has the Responsibility to protect the Public from unnecessary environmental health hazards it seems probable that it is now essential, based upon the 10 year evidence beginning to come through, that the ODPM/DCLR should at last accept the arguments made since 2001, that paragraphs 29 and 30 of Planning Policy Guidance Circular PPG8 and its Appendix need to be re-written so as to comply (1) with common law and subsequently (2) with the Requirements of Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights as introduced by Section 6 (1) of the Human Rights Act 1998, and in addition to be consistent with the Housing Planning circular PPG3 - In addition the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 now in force can no longer be casually ignored.
(1) Newport v Secretary of State for Wales (1997)
(2) R v Brent London Borough Council and Others and Oxfordshire County Council's Exclusion Appeals Panel and Another (Judgment May 17, 2002).
(3) Note of meeting with Yvette Cooper
AAM 17 October 2006