scrutinyprocess.html

We welcome the States deciding to review this issue through the scrutiny process and we thank the Scrutiny Committee Panel for their thorough investigation of the subject. We look forward to the States of Jersey's attention to the issue of electromagnetic radiation and a precautionary approach in the the interest of Islanders health. The full report can be viewed at www.scrutiny.gov.je The below provides the Charimans forward and recommendations of the report. 1 FOREWORD - CHAIRMAN Having been elected Chairman of the Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel it was rather a surprise to be agreeing within hours to undertake a Scrutiny Review of Mobile Telephone Masts, subject to a number of provisos. Initially there were no other Panel Members, no Officers, no budget, so I believe it is timely to thank all those most sincerely who have helped to make it all happen and for the Review to proceed with a thorough investigation taking place and a detailed and comprehensive report produced in an efficient and timely manner. Panel and Scrutiny Thanks to all concerned: fellow Panel members - Deputy Collin Egré, Constable Mike Jackson and Senator Ben Shenton; Scrutiny Officers - Mike Haden for doing detailed background research in December/January, Malcolm Orbell, whose introduction was a baptism of fire to the Scrutiny process, Carol Le Quesne for her due diligence, care and attention to detail, who made it all happen and steered this Review to its final conclusions, and to all other Scrutiny staff who contributed. Submissions and Evidence To the public and professional witnesses, to the public for their submissions (from 2 line e-mails to 100+ pages - all are valued and all appreciated.) Also to the many references to United Kingdom Local Authorities, Government Agencies, Independent organisations as well as reports and authorities from all over the world. Submissions were not limited to paper and e-mail; references were made to television programmes, newspaper articles, dvds produced by others, video recordings and website examples - responses were truly international. Applying Minds Set against this background the Panel had to apply its individual and collective minds to draw logical conclusions from the mass of technical, and on occasions, emotive material and apply this to seek an interpretation of how best this could be utilised for Jersey's situation. Billions of Mobiles Mobile phone technology moves at a pace - it was said to us in the evidence that it took 20 years to sell the first billion mobile phones and it then took 18 months to sell the second billion world-wide - this demonstrates the rapid consumer-led growth. Tensions were found It is against this background of relatively new and advanced technology that some tension was found to exist between engineering standards and benchmarks and medical opinion, some of which is emerging with the passage of time. Words often found are "a precautionary approach", the debate continues as to what exactly this should be. Different authorities and organisations are continually reviewing and debating the issues surrounding emerging international learned views and opinions. Suspicions abound when industry sponsorship emerges to be balanced with the industry wishing to actively participate in informed debate and discussion. Young People and Mobile Phones Our investigations have raised questions about considering possible harm reduction to younger children from the use of mobile phones - while not under our Terms of Reference it would be remiss not to mention this - parents should seek more information from reliable sources and "a precautionary approach" should be adopted. This should also apply to adults as without exception informed evidence says that mobile phone use has greater possible health related problems than mobile telephone masts. Wi-Fi in schools Questions were raised about the installation of systems in schools and whether this was monitored and how health effects (if any) could be monitored - again "a precautionary approach" is required. Siting of Masts The Panel viewed the general Planning process; however, what did emerge was that significant sums of money are changing hands for leasing of land and vantage points for masts. Other issues flowed from this about public liability insurance and in future what the rateable value should be - matters that need to be addressed by others. Conclusion This Scrutiny Review started on the back-foot: as I have described earlier and some tension existed between politicians and the public about whether there was anyone listening - whether some public concern was shared politically. I hope this Review will allay those fears - calm the tension that existed and convince all concerned that this issue was well worth the time and effort and that the public voice - collectively and individually - was heard and politically the recommendations will be positively acted upon in future for public information, benefit and confidence. The Sub-Panel would like to take the opportunity to extend special thanks to the Jersey Mast Concern Group for its efforts. Deputy Alan Breckon Chairman RECOMMENDATIONS Health and Social Services Health Protection Department Report recommendations The Sub-Panel considers that the following actions recommended within the Health and Social Services Health Protection Department Report together with its own additional recommendations are required to ensure that an adequate precautionary approach is adopted - 1. All base stations are to be subject to the scrutiny of the planning applications process to ensure compliance with internationally agreed standards. 2. There should be improved consultation by the network operators with the community prior to the selection of a site for a base station. 3. Emissions from base stations must as a minimum meet the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure, as expressed in the EU Council Recommendation. However the States should seek to ensure that Network operators voluntarily agree to comply with levels lower than international guidelines (namely ICNIRP and NRPB). 4. Measurement of the actual levels of radiation from base stations must be undertaken following commissioning to show compliance and be a condition of the planning permit. 5. Mobile Phone network operators co-operate to deliver with the States of Jersey a database of information available to the public on radio base stations. 6. There is cross industry agreement on the sharing of sites and masts for radio base stations wherever possible. The Sub-Panel considers that on the basis of the evidence it has received and scrutinized that the following additional actions recommended are necessary to ensure that an adequate precautionary approach is adopted - 1. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Health and Social Services be invited to undertake the following and report back to the States before the end of 2007 - The further evaluation and scrutiny, as to whether or not the acceptable levels of EMF emissions recommended by ICNIRP (1999) remain appropriate and relevant, given the lapse of time since their introduction and the age of the database used for their development (pre 1998). Especially in light of the reduced levels of EMF emission standards, adopted in some other jurisdictions. The reduction in those other jurisdictions appear to be on the basis of more recently published research (post-1999) into cell integrity and the occurrence of certain illnesses when individuals are subjected to EMFs. 1.1 That the evidence from new research suggesting that biological functions, including functions of the brain, may be affected, by EMF levels must be evaluated by health professionals locally and the findings reported back to the States before the end of 2007. The Sub-Panel recognises that there is, as yet, no conclusive evidence that these biological effects constitute a health hazard, but at present, only limited data are available. 1.2 That a report evaluating the following research be presented to the States prior to the end of 2007 - · University of Essex peer reviewed research to be available mid-year 2007; · Human cell EMFs research by Drs. G. Carlo and G. Oberfeld. 1.3 To investigate and report on the reduction in approved EMF emission levels in other Jurisdictions and to consider the basis upon which the decision to reduce levels was made. 2. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Ministers for Health and Social Services, Economic Development and Planning and Environment be invited to agree to the following - 2.1 In addition to the first recommendation from the April 2006 Health Protection Report, to ensure that all base stations are subject to a planning application. (It is noted that the Minister for Planning and Environment has already complied with that recommendation). 2.2 That the necessary measures should be identified to introduce the establishment of agreed emission levels with the operators on individual mobile masts of any description on a case by case basis. (The Sub-Panel considers that the more stringent precautionary approach is justified on the basis of the growing level of expert opinion expressing concern over the effect of EMFs. A model for the site by site approach has been developed in South Tyrol and should be emulated in Jersey.) 3. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Economic Development be requested to provide the JCRA with guidance on social grounds to ensure the following - 3.1 The Sub-Panel is of the opinion that the JCRA should be given guidance suggesting that it ensures that States-approved consultation time scales are adhered to during a consultation process. The terms of consultation on issues which could potentially impact on public health should be clearly outlined and agreed and follow best practice on consultation; and, 3.2 That guidance be issued to request the requirement to ensure that Network operators either voluntarily agree or comply through the introduction of an additional licensing clause relating to agreeing EMF emission levels on a site by site basis lower than international guidelines. 3.3 That guidance should be issued requiring emission monitoring compliance to be undertaken by an independent body, to be appointed by the JCRA and funded by the telephone operators. That the guidance should recommend that the appointee would be required to undertake periodic (quarterly) random emission testing of radiation from base stations without prior notice to the operator. The JCRA would monitor and ensure operators compliance with their issued licences and that the reports from those tests be made publicly available, 3.4 That the guidance would suggest that operators should as part of their licence be required to fund the development and management of a website using a mapping system which shows the island topography and location of all macro, micro and pico cells, lattice masts and TETRA installations. 3.4.1 That the website should identify overlapping (increased emission or cumulative emission areas) and show the acceptable EMF emission reading for the individual cell stations together with the EMF emission level from the independently taken readings. 3.4.2 The website should also provide the latest information on mobile technology. Any changes to or additions to the cells should be posted on the website. 3.4.3 That the guidance should recommend that the JCRA requires that operators should provide at no cost emission testing to individuals at their domicile if a complaint relating to the level of EMF emissions has been made. (An agreed and reasonable process for individuals should be developed in this regard. Equipment used by the operator for this person should be calibrated annually by the external body retained for independent testing of EMF emissions.) 3.4.4 That the Minister for Economic Development liaise with the JCRA to develop enabling legislation without the requirement for complaint from an operator, to require mast sharing and impose a licence requirement that the mobile telephony infrastructure be operated through a fibre optic network wherever possible. The erection of multiple mast clusters should also be discouraged. 3.4.5 That guidance should be issued to recommend that the JCRA take the necessary action to set a commercially acceptable rate at which all operators can access the Jersey Telecommunications existing fibre optic system in order to reduce the potential social and perceived environmental impact of the proliferation of masts and increased emissions. 4. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Treasury and Resources be requested to review the following issues on the basis of evidence received - 4.1 The possible impact on property values as a result of mobile telephone masts being located next to private properties and suggested depreciation on those values. 5. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Chief Minister be requested to consider the following and to report on - 5.1 The extent of public liability insurance held by the States in respect of TETRA mast operation; and, 5.2 Tasking the Computer Services Department with overseeing the selection of the appropriate company to undertake the development of the proposed mobile telephone/TETRA mast and associated information website. To establish an appropriate management process to operate the website on behalf of the relevant States Departments and the telephone operators. 6. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Home Affairs be requested to agree to ensuring that the following action is undertaken and to report to the States prior to the end of 2007 - 6.1 That a detailed list of the location and EMF emission levels of all TETRA sites will be released as a matter of public information and provided for inclusion onto a website, as is the practice in the United Kingdom, to be funded and established by the telecommunications operators. 7. The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Planning and Environment - 7.1 Confirms that the necessary power is available to him within the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 or subordinate legislation to insist that any existing mobile mast structures can be moved or removed if the perceived health risks associated with EMF emissions are proven and international guidelines change (or if masts are found not to be compliant with guidelines). 7.2 To confirm that if that provision in statute is not currently available, that he will take the necessary action to ensure its addition to the existing legislation. 5 TIMETABLE The issue of mobile telephone masts and the concerns raised by the Public was brought to the attention of the States Assembly by Deputy P. Ryan in his proposition to the States, dated 2nd November 2006, entitled 'Committee of Inquiry: Mobile Telecommunications' P.144/2006. The Council of Ministers presented its Comments on 21st November 2006 and the States considered the matter on 22nd November 2006. Following States consideration of P.144/2006, Deputy A. Breckon, Chairman of the Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel, agreed to consider the undertaking of a review by a Sub-Panel, to be established following the Panel's first meeting and agreement and also subsequent to discussions with the Chairmen's Committee. The Chairman discussed proposals to undertake a focused review into the perceived health risks associated with mobile telephone masts, at the Chairmen's Committee meetings of the 15th and 20th December 2006. No definitive way forward was agreed on those occasions; as a result the issue was raised at the first meeting of the Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel on 29th December 2006 when the Panel supported the principle of establishing a Sub-Panel to review the matter. The preparation and establishment of a Sub-Panel to undertake a mobile telephone mast review was progressed by the Health, Social Services and Housing Scrutiny Panel in accordance with Standing Order 135. The Panel agreed that a review should be undertaken on its behalf into the perceived health implications from mobile telephone masts. The Sub-Panel was approved on that date (29th December 2006) and its membership was agreed on 2nd January 2007. The Sub-Panel proceeded as follows - Friday 5th January First Sub-Panel Meeting Wednesday 10th January Informal Meeting selecting speakers Monday 15th January Sub-Panel Meeting Thursday 18th January Evening Public Meeting, Hautlieu School Friday 19th January Public Hearing Friday 19th January Evening Public Meeting, St. Brelade, Parish Hall Monday 22nd January Full day Public Hearing, States Chamber Tuesday 23rd January Full day Public Hearing, States Chamber Wednesday 24th January Full day Public Hearing, States Chamber Thursday 1st February Sub-Panel Meeting Thursday 15th February Public Hearing Thursday 15th February Public Meeting, Town Hall Friday 16th February Public Hearing Monday 26th February Public Hearing followed by Public Meeting. Tuesday 6th March Sub-Panel Meeting Tuesday 20th March Sub-Panel Meeting Thursday 22nd March Sub-Panel Meeting (Telephone meeting) Tuesday 3rd April Sub-Panel Meeting Wednesday 4th April Draft Report out for comment under embargo Friday 13th April Sub-Panel Meeting to finalise and sign of Report Friday 20th April Report presentation and public launch at the States Bookshop, Morier House, 9.30 a.m. - 11.30a.m. Wednesday 23rd and Friday 25th May Public Hearing proposed dates Tuesday 29th May Sub-Panel Meeting Tuesday 5th June Proposition to the States The Sub-Panel experienced no difficulties obtaining information which it had requested; it also appreciated the significant amount of time invested by the participants in this review to provide the answers to its questions.

States Scrutiny Panel

`States Scrutiny Panel`