Summary of Oral Evidence presented to IEGMP by Mr G McAlister, Friends of the Earth Scotland, on Friday 12 November 1999

Home > Summaries of Oral Evidence >

Mr McAlister indicated that there is currently great concern about possible health effects of exposure from mobile phone signals, and suggested that most of this centres on base station emissions. He has recently given evidence to the Scottish Parliament enquiry on telecommunications. Mr McAlister believes that there is cross-party concern on the issue of mobile phone safety and suggests that many people see adoption of precautionary approaches as a way forward. Although he accepts that there is insufficient evidence for adverse effects at present, this does not mean, however, that they will not occur. He expressed concern about the peer-review process, suggesting that it may be difficult to get some work published. Mr McAlister noted that in order to foster debate, the Lancet has recently published work on genetically modified organisms even though it was judged to be flawed. There is concern that guidelines are based on thermal effects, and do not give sufficient weight to non-thermal effects, even though the possibility of such effects has been accepted by organisations such as the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in Australia. A number of reports have identified areas for future research and if the Expert Group were to do the same, it would be welcomed by Friends of the Earth Scotland. However, Mr McAlister noted that it would be some time before the results of such work could be available, and that reaching scientific consensus could be a prolonged process. In the interim, he would like to see a cautious approach to the siting of base stations. These are more of an issue than handsets because there is no element of personal choice in the exposure. The planning process is an area of considerable concern and is addressed in the submission from Friends of the Earth Scotland to the Scottish Parliament. Mr McAlister feels that in general, members of the public have difficulty obtaining advice relating to these issues, and that this needs to be addressed.

Mr McAlister feels that there are two elements to precautionary approaches. In relation to handsets, there is a need for more published information about exposure levels. However, this is a complex issue, because of adaptive power control, and so some interpretation of the data would also need to be available to enable the public to make informed choices. Labelling of phones would also be needed. In relation to base stations, the most constructive approach would be to keep them away from sensitive sites such as schools and hospitals. Children may be at greater risk, and yet masts are often sited in school playgrounds and close to school buildings; it could make better commercial sense to avoid such areas. Friends of the Earth Scotland recognises that base station exposure is a difficult issue, and does not recommend any particular size of exclusion zone; the organisation advised Dundee City Council against the blanket introduction of 400 metre cordons sanitaire. Friends of the Earth Scotland favours the establishment of a forum for discussion between health/medical experts, scientists, academics, independent technical advisors and operators to arrive at a sensible safe distance. In the interim, Friends of the Earth Scotland would like to see a cautious approach that avoids development in sensitive areas. One option may be to erect taller masts with greater ranges, in less populated areas, i.e. industrial sites. The Group recognised that the question of masts on school premises is an emotive issue, but was concerned about how to best set exposure guidelines. Mr McAlister feels that thermal effects are better understood than anything else, and that there is evidence that children could be more sensitive to thermal effects than adults, so there is justification for avoiding schools. In general Scottish councils apply precautionary approaches with regard to the property they own, and do not permit development near schools, hospitals, homes for the elderly and densely populated residential areas. Councils would like to have information about the direction of emitted beams, but have difficulty in obtaining this information from operators.

Mr McAlister feels that there is a need for clear guidance from Government because the system is not working at the local level. There are particular concerns about the planning process, especially the discretionary aspects of the Prior Approvals System that is currently used in England and Wales, and likely to be adopted in Scotland. There is scope for improving communication between the Department of Health and the local health authorities. In addition, documents from health boards to councils should be available as public documents. The National Radiological Protection Board is seen as too reactive; it should become more pro-active, issuing quarterly or half-yearly reports to summarise the current state of knowledge. Such reports might still conclude that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate the existence of non-thermal effects, but would at least acknowledge that there are some data and could reference the most recent publications. Although many agencies have some involvement in the mobile phone issue, there currently appears to be no real focus.

Mr McAlister believes that there is a strong case for the introduction of roaming within the UK, which could reduce the number of base stations required, whilst also improving coverage in rural areas. Neither the operators nor the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) have raised this possibility in evidence to the Scottish Parliament. Indeed, operators appeared generally unwilling to discuss the issue, even though they have each reached large numbers of roaming agreements with overseas networks. Efforts by DTI to introduce roaming on existing networks have been blocked by legal action. However, Mr McAlister suggested that roaming could be required as a condition of third generation licences. The Group had already heard about some of the difficulties involved in mast sharing, but Mr McAlister was adamant that this is a separate issue and is technically feasible. Although operators have previously been unwilling to address this issue, the Federation of Electronics Industries is now seeking to open a dialogue. Mr McAlister suggested that past communication problems could have arisen from an unwillingness on the part of any one person to speak on behalf of the industry as a whole. Unfortunately this had created the impression that the industry is secretive.

There is concern that the simple precautionary approach advocated by Friends of the Earth Scotland may not be easy to apply in all situations. A more proscriptive approach based on radiation levels may be easier to apply. Mr McAlister feels that there could be problems in setting limits based on field values. A value of 20 milliwatts per square metre has been suggested, but some studies have suggested possible effects at lower levels. He feels that there was some merit in Dr Irvine's suggestion of limits based on electromagnetic compatability. In the interim, Friends of the Earth Scotland would like to see: telecommunications developments removed from the system of permitted development rights; health or potential health implications recognised as a material planning consideration; adoption of a precautionary policy preventing siting of base stations on schools, nurseries, hospitals and in residential areas. Mr McAlister recognises that the New Zealand model, which uses the concept of ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable), is good in principle, but is concerned that there could still be studies suggesting effects at levels below those permitted.

First issued 9 May 2000