| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 May 2003 : Column 731W—continued
Wind Farms
Mr. Blizzard: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will require local planning authorities to issue local supplementary planning guidance on wind farm applications in advance of their next plan review cycle. [113974]
Mr. McNulty: No. Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 12 clearly states that Supplementary Planning Guidance should not be used to update plans in this way. A draft revised version of PPG22 on renewable energy will be published for consultation later this year. The Government expect local planning authorities to update plans on a regular basis to take account of new Government policy. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister expects to update plans once the final version of the new PPG22 has been published. If plans are out of date and not in line with Government policy, then new PPGs will be material considerations to be taken into account in planning decisions.
20 May 2003 : Column 732W
HEALTH
Mobile Phone Masts Mobile Phones
Linda Perham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make it his policy to reduce the UK's accepted levels of radiation emissions from mobile telephone masts. [112541]
Ms Blears: The National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) has the statutory responsibility for advising the Government on exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMFs). This includes radiofrequency (RF) radiation from mobile phone masts. The advice from NRPB is, however, concerned with exposures to EMFs from all sources.
NRPB has recently issued a consultation document in which it proposes new advice on exposure guidelines for EMFs. The consultation document is posted on its website at: http://www.nrpb.org/publications/consultation documents/emf consultation document.htm
In its new advice, the NRPB recommends adopting for the United Kingdom the guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICNIRP) in 1998. It thus covers the range of emissions from mobile phone masts, for which the limits are based on preventing any effects caused by whole or partial body heating.
In the last few years the Radiocommunications Agency (RA) and the NRPB have carried out and published measurements of people's exposures to RF near to base station sites. The data show that exposure to signals from masts at locations accessible to the general public is very much lower than guideline levels advised by the ICNIRP.
This finding is consistent with the conclusions in a report prepared by an independent expert group on mobile phones under the chairmanship of Sir William Stewart, FRS, FRSE. The expert group published its report on Mobile Phones and Health in May 2000 and it is available on the group's web site at: www.ieqmp.orq.uk. The conclusion of IEGMP on exposures to signals from masts was that:
- "The balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be small fractions of guidelines."
Ms Blears [holding answer 15 May 2003]: The public health implications of mobile phone base stations were assessed by the independent expert group on mobile phones (IEGMP), chaired by Sir William Stewart. Its report, issued in May 2000, was a comprehensive review of relevant research and can be found on its website at www.iegmp.org.uk. A main conclusion was that:
- "The balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be small fractions of guidelines."
20 May 2003 : Column 733W
international guidelines. The information is available on the NRBP website at www.nrpb.org—see publications NRPB R-321 and on the RA website at www. radio.gov.uk—see mobile phone base stations.
The IEGMP proposed that gaps in knowledge were sufficient to justify a precautionary approach to the development of this technology and recommendations were made for further research. The LINK Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHR) has now been established under an independent Programme Management Committee (PMC). Research studies already underway are mainly concerned with the use of mobile phone handsets but the PMC has recently commissioned an epidemiological study addressing public concerns about possible health risks from exposure to emissions from base stations. It is one of the first such studies in the world. Further information can be found on the MTHR website at www.mthr.orq.uk.
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent research he has received on mobile phone usage and associated physiological damage, with particular reference to (a) cataract growth and (b) molecular damage; and if he will make a statement. [112509]
Ms Blears: A number of studies on the purported biological effects of mobile phone usage have been published in the scientific press. These include work on cataract formation published in the Chinese Medical Journal in December 2002 and molecular studies in various journals. The quality of the reports is variable and they can only be properly assessed in totality by a review group with the appropriate wide ranging expertise.
The Stewart Report in May 2000 provided a comprehensive review of the possible health effects of radiofrequency exposure from the use of mobile phones and found that "exposures to radiofrequency (RF) radiation below guidelines does not cause adverse health effects to the general population." Similar conclusions were reached by a Royal Society of Canada Expert Panel (1999), the Health Council of the Netherlands (2000), an Expert Group set up by the French Government (2001) and the British Medical Association (2001).
The Stewart Report recommended that there should be a further comprehensive review of the science related to possible health effects of exposure to RF radiation within three years. This review is being carried out by the National Radiological Protection Board's (NRPB) independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation (AGNIR). The review is nearing completion and will be finalised by the end of 2003.
National Service Framework for Older People
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 7 April, Official Report, column 105W, on the National Service Framework for older people, if he will place a copy of the monitoring exercise in the Library. [108993]
Jacqui Smith: The results of the monitoring exercise were published in the progress report, National Service Framework for Older people: A Report of Progress and future Challenges,2003, copies of which were sent to all English right hon. and hon. Members.
20 May 2003 : Column 734W
Anti-psychotic Medication
Mr. Dhanda: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action he is taking to ensure that anti-psychotic medication is not being prescribed unnecessarily to older people in nursing homes. [113711]
Jacqui Smith: The older people's national service framework (NSF) recognises that there has been concern about the inappropriate prescribing of anti-psychotics to people with dementia, especially those in care homes. By implementing the NSF, particularly the medicines management supplement, inappropriate prescribing is being tackled.
There is other relevant action. For example, under the care homes regulatory regime, care homes are required to keep meticulous medical and drug records on every resident and, if the National Care Standards Commission finds evidence of over-prescription or maladministration of drugs, it will report such evidence to the police and the professional bodies of those involved for further action.
In addition, on 31 March 2003, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health announced that the National Institute for Clinical Excellence will be producing a guideline on the care of people with dementia, including the use of anti-psychotics, as part of the eighth wave of its programme. This will be important in achieving the best use of anti-psychotic medication for people with dementia.
Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust
Mr. Wilshire: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will make a statement on the pay differentials between staff of the Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust based at (a) Ashford and (b) Chertsey; [113092]
- (2) what plans he has to provide the resources needed to enable the Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust to implement the recommendations in the Commission for Health Improvement report on the trust's maternity services; [113129]
(3) if he will make a statement on the progress made with the implementation of the Franchise Plan for the Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust; [113130]
(4) what discussions have taken place between his officials and officers of the Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust about the possibility of opening a midwife-led maternity unit at Ashford Hospital; [113131]
(5) what discussions have taken place between his officials and officers of the Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust about Dr. Kevin Gangar. [113132]
Ms Blears [holding answer 19 May 2003]: The Government's policy is to put as much National Health Service funding as possible at the front-line. In 2003–04, the Surrey and Sussex Strategic Health Authority (SHA) area will receive a recurrent allocation of £2,269 million, a 9.29 per cent, cash terms increase on the previous year. The maternity unit at the Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust is currently undergoing a £1.4 million programme of modernisation and refurbishment.
20 May 2003 : Column 735W
It is a matter for the trust, working with the SHA, to produce and implement an action plan for the recommendations made by the Commission for Health Improvement (CHI). It is understood that the trust is in the process of doing this.
Advice from the SHA suggests that significant progress has been made on the franchise plan for Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust. Since the plan was agreed the trust has:
- Implemented a £10 million capital programme, including additional theatre capacity at Ashford Hospital and Medical Assessment Unit at St. Peter's Hospital.
Improved recruitment and retention.
Improved communications with staff and stakeholders.
Agreed capacity plans with local primary care trusts.
Moved from being a zero star to one star trust.
The responsibility for the disciplining of doctors is a matter for the employing trust, which will take into account the outcome of General Medical Council hearings.
It is understood that prior to Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust merger, Ashford Hospital paid staff a London weighting allowance whereas St. Peter's Hospital did not. This differential has gradually been phased out as employees move but some are still affected. The Agenda for Change initiative provides the trust with an opportunity to address this differential.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |