| The following colour scheme applies to docs on this site |
Word Docs | PDF Docs | HTML Docs |
This forum relates to issues connected to the proposed
Communications Bill
Communication Installations, Apparatus and Equipment (Planning, Operation and Control) Bill
To offer your help or support for either the Telecoms Bill or the Welsh Motion, whether you are an individual, campaign group or elected representative (Cllr. MP, MEP, MSP, AM) then please send us an email.
IMPORTANT FOR WELSH SUPPORTERS - also see section below on the resolution by Assembly Member Janet Davis (Plaid Cymru) to the National Assembly for Wales.
What the Telecom Bill does
This Bill sets out a number of concerns relating to the planning processes for the phone mast planning regime in England. It simplifies some of the aspects contained in previous Bills, whilst incorporating some new but important provisions. The main provisions of the Bill are – All mobile telecom mast planning applications to be by full planning permission – an introduction of the precautionary principle – a requirement to have health notices on mobile phones, DECT and WiFI equipment – the placing of warning notices on mast installations – a ban on the sale of mobile phones to children.
Full Planning Permission
The primary purpose of the Bill is to remove permitted development rights from telecommunication installations, aswell as the controversial network being installed by Network Rail and other new systems that are in the pipe line. This will bring back an element of public confidence to the telecom planning regime, and is long over due, as well as ensuring that local residents affected by such proposals have the ability to put forward representations on all installations.
In similar vein the Bill requires applications for planning permission to be applied for upgrades to existing installations, and removes the ability of Code System Operators to flout the planning process by undertaking installations without planning permission by removing the right to apply for retrospective planning permission for telecom installations.
The Bill also removes permitted development rights from statutory undertakers such as Network Rail in relation to communication installations on their operational land, thus taking out of play the very controversial Network Rail 30 metre plus masts that require at present no planning permission.
Precautionary Principle
The most controversial aspect of the Bills proposals is to introduce a requirement to undertake a precautionary approach to health and environmental concerns caused by mast installations. However in truth it is not that controversial, indeed the Government introduced within PPG25 a requirement to undertake a precautionary approach to those developments where there is a potential for a negative impact on the environment. And of course the Government is signing up to the Rio Declaration has effectively conceded that in all matters relating to the environment, including issues relating to the human environment (i.e. public health) that there is a need to take a precautionary approach to decision making.
There are arguments that may relate to the manner in which the proposals will need to be taken into account, but most if not all of those arguments can be addressed through guidance or if needed regulations. In reality the process can be directly linked to the already widely used Environmental Impact Regulations, these take a similar format, and local planning authorities have few if any problems in dealing with those, albeit that unlike previous Bills these proposals do not require any formal statement, only that the LPA must take into account issues that relate to the precautionary principle as set out in Sch 1 of the Bill. This means representations from all quarters, it does not mean that an LPA is duty bound to refuse an application just because there are negative effects upon human health or the environment, only that they must give due consideration to such representations.
Health Notice on Communication Equipment
This provision is aimed at ensuring at the point of sale that every purchaser is aware of the potential dangers of emissions from mobile phones, as well as labelling each such piece of equipments emission level. This will enable as with food labelling for consumers to have a more informed choice over their purchases.
We have also included within this provision not only mobile phones but other devises of a similar nature such as hands free phones (DECT) and the new WiFi communication devices. There are good justification for such inclusion that is most likely beyond this limited briefing but if any MPs need more in-depth briefings on this aspect, or indeed any other aspect of the Bills provisions we shall be happy to provide it.
Warning Notices on Apparatus
Sir William Stewart in his 2001 report called for internationally recognised warning signs to be placed on all telecoms equipment, this provision simply carries through that proposition. The fact is there are many hidden installations, and clearly those living close to those installations have a right to know they exist and what the highest emission levels are going to be.
This provision does not only require notices on new installations but on all existing installations, the requirement relating to the transmission of signals, therefore there will be an ongoing requirement to keep notices on the installations, with a fine if they fail to do so. In most cases this should not present any problem, as health and safety will require notices in regards to the need to know the key holder of compounds etc. for fire and other safety reasons, therefore the provision is not as onerous as it might first appear.
Sale of Communication Equipment to Children
There have been many calls to restrict the sale of mobile phones to children with promises made by the industry to stop the advertising aimed at children, nevertheless children can still purchase mobile phones. Are they safe, are they not safe, that is a debatable question, but what is clear is that if there is a risk to health then the greatest risk is to children. Indeed there is advice from the HPA not to hold mobile phones to the head for long period of time, it is clear therefore that there is a potential risk, even if only very small of ill health being caused to children. That being so it is arguable that there should be restrictions on the sale of mobile phones to children. This Bill does not restrict the use of mobile phones by children only the sale to children, if a parent or other responsible adult chooses to buy a mobile phone for that child then that is a choice of that adult, but is it a choice that we should restrict to those who may not have the maturity to make a choice that is in that child's best interests.
How can you help
In the short term to issue statements of support for the Telecoms Bill both as individuals and as organisations the more supporters, particularly groups and organisations that support the principle of the Bill the greater chance of its success. In the medium term we need to promote first the Telecoms Bill to the wider community and to encourage MPs to support it, and to be in the House to vote on its Second Reading, and to ensure that the Bill is not ripped to shreds in the committee stage.
National Assembly for Wales - Telecom Motion
After a defeat on a motion to introduce stronger plannig measures by a small margin, Janet Davis (Plaid Cymru) AM came back with a further motion which gained a unanimous vote of support from the Assembly, that motion required the First Minister to draft proposals that will effectively end prior approval for telecoms in Wales. The final deate and vote is on the 29th Nov 2006, we shall report back here when we know the result.
Media Releases
Please redistribute these to your local, regional and national media contacts.
You may add any appropriate qoute in support of the Bill on behalf of your group/organisation.
| These will be drafted and put here in the next few days |
Letters Requesting Support - These letters are for the last Bill and will be updated in te next few days but they still give the basis for letters
Please use these as templates for local letters to MPs, MEPs, Councillors, Councils etc
This section is from the last Bill we shall update this with LPA supporting this Bill in the near future
Local Authorities Passing Motions of Support
| Authority | Resolution |
| Richmond Borough Council | This council call upon our MPs and Baroness Hamwee of Richmond upon Thames to support the Telecommunication Masts (Planning Control) Bill removing permitted development rights from telecommunications developments and widening the issues to be taken into account in determining planning applications for such developments to address public concerns. |
| West Berkshire Borough Council | The motion calls on "such masts should be subject to full planning controls" it goes on to say that "the precautionary principle should apply giving schools, homes and medical facilities extra safeguards".
(Sorry full motion not available). |
| Derby City Council | "Call on the Government to bring forward revised regulations that make the installation of mobile telephone masts, regardless of their height, the subject of full local authority planning processes, Council resolves to write to the City's three MPs strongly urgingthem to vote in favour of the Private Members Bill" |
| London Borough of Haringey | This Council resolves:
- To write to Haringey's two Members of Parliament
requesting they lobby Ministers for a moratorium on
mast sites near to schools, hospitals and residential
properties
- To ask our Members of Parliament to support any
Bills in Parliament which would mean safer siting of
phone masts, including giving Councils clear authority
to reject mast applications on local public health
grounds
- To write to all other London Boroughs to ask for
their support in pushing for health concerns to be
relevant
(note the full resolution can be downloaded from HERE) |
| Preston City Council | States that in 2004 they passed a motion in support of provisions that are similar to a motion of support for the Bill and therefore they do not feel a new motion is needed. |
| Hart District Council | The motion sets out the Bills provisions and then goes on to state
The Bill needs the maximum support of all parties to ensure that it is adopted and taken forward.
to this end this Council supports the main elements of the Bill and requests the Cabinet Members for Health and Planning to write to
a. The MPs presenting and supporting the Bill expressing its support, and
b. Our local MPs asking them to appear in the House when the Bill is read and support the Bill in its passage through Parliament. |
| Wyre Forest District Council | The Cabinet Scrutiny Committee made recommendations to support the principles behind the Bill and to write to Richard Taylor MP, all Political Parties Spokespersons and MPs in Worcestershire asking them to support the Bill. The recommendations were subsequently endorsed by the Cabinet |
| Basingstoke & Deanne Borough Council | The full council unanimously supported the principles of the Bill but have referred it for action to committee |
| Wychavon District Council | Committee has instructed Head of Planning to request that their local MPs attend the Commons to support the Bill. |
| Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council | Council Motion
(1) This Council calls upon Wirral's four Labour MPs to support the Telecommunication Masts (Planning Control) Bill
(2) The Private Members Bill will remove permitted development rights from telecommunications developments and widen the issues that can be taken into account in determining such applications in order to address public concerns
A proposed amendment widening the concerns and pointing to the full scope of the Bill was lost |
| Winchester City Council | The motion gives support o the Bil and calls on all MPs in Hampshire to support the Bill |
| Woking Borough Council | Full support for the Bill to give local authorities greater control over the proliferation of mobile phone masts |
Please let us know of any authorities that pass resolutions of support
List of Supporting Organisations
| Planning Sanity (CfPS) |
| Mast Sanity |
| Schools and Hospitals Against MAST Emissions (SHAME) |
| Whitton Against Radiation Masts WARM |
| Orpington Residents Against Masts ORAM |
| Harrogate ? CAMPUS |
| St Edmunds School |
| TSG UK Ltd |
| Concerned Parents Against Masts Near St Pauls Steiner |
Please add your organisation to this list
Or go to the Planning Sanity listing of MPs by constituency
List of Supporters
| Chris Maile |
Simon Preedy |
David Baron |
Pamela Brown |
Paul Thake |
Phyllis Bridge |
| Gemma Davies |
Marre Dafforn |
Alison Pedone |
Linda Bowen |
Helen Mummery |
Trish Ames |
| Eileen Wright |
Sarah Purdy |
Phil McGovern |
Sylvia Wright |
Julie Boyce |
Lynn Stapleton |
| Catriona Nason |
John Domigan |
William Cofie |
Hazel Taylor |
Darren Taylor |
Cedlia Brooks |
| Helen Bryce |
Cassandra Wilcox |
Claire Goodman |
Amanda Wesley |
Deborah Law |
Lisa Watts |
Please send us an email to add your name to this list
List of Elected Representatives Supporting Telecom Bill
Please request that your name is added here to ensure that your constituents are aware of your support.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2006-03-03a.550.0&s=speaker%3A11389
MOA (Mast Operators Association) Representation on the Welsh Motion
(this representation is to the National Assembly for Wales on the Welsh Motion,
but presumably this will be similar to the response to the Curry Bill)
- The precautionary statement would cause real difficilites for local planning
authorities that would have to interpret the precautionary statement for
specific cases and would result in inconsistency, unfairness and confusion
everywhere.
- Authorities do not have experience or resources to address complex
representations which may be made to them on health and safety grouds in the
context of tele comms.
- The national radiological protection board report states that while planning
is a local issue - the assessment of evidence related to possible health
concerns associated with exposures to RF fields from base stations is best
dealt with nationallly. The requirement to submit a precautionary statement
contradicts the advice of the gov't senior independent scientific advisors
on this issue.
- The current framework is already based on a precautionary approach. All
mobile operators base stations must comply with recommendations of Stewart
Report 2000 which recommended a precautionary approach be adopted and ICNIRP
guidelines be adopted and compliance with these guidelines is now a
statutory requirement in Wales.
- An independent audit of mobile phone base station radiofrequency emissions
undertaken by ofcom since 2001 confimrs the stewart reports expectation that
exposures are expected to be small fractions of the guidelines.
- Removing permitted development rights will do nothing to address the
concerns people have with these developments. It would result in an
increase in the number of of full planning applications to local planning
authorities. The increase in workload would have bad impact of
telecommunications development and other planning applications.
- Would adversely affect the 61 million moblie phone users whose phones will
not work without a network of bases stations.
(c) Planning Sanity - February 2006 (can be freely used by local communities within their campaigns. Publication by third parties is permitted providing acknowledgement of Planning Sanity is given).
THIS CAMPAIGN IS FUNDED FROM YOUR DONATIONS - PLEASE GIVE GENEROUSLY
FUNDRAISING SECTION
