In its response to the above report in October 2006, the Government acknowledged criticisms of the process of negotiating the Directive, and indicated a strong intention to learn lessons from this episode. This memorandum seeks to update the Committee on general developments in the field since the Government's response in October 2006.

  Work in relation to the EMF Directive has continued in partnership with stakeholders including those in the medical community, those from other sectors such as the manufacturing organisation, EEF, and other government bodies. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has worked throughout the year with the European Commission and other Member States on concerns about the Directive.

  HSE published research into the impact of the Directive on MRI in June 2007. This confirmed the concerns of the MRI community that some procedures, as currently practised, could expose workers to EMFs above the exposure limit values set out in the Directive, and brought this to the attention of the European Commission.

  In the light of this and other evidence, the Director General of the Directorate General for Employment and Social Affairs has written, most recently in July 2007, to Member States with a commitment to take action including a possible postponement of the implementation date of the Directive. The most recent of these letters is at Annex 1.

  Other relevant improvements made by HSE and other government bodies to ensure similar problems do not arise again are outlined below, many of these already underway in advance of the Committee's Inquiry.

IMPACT OF THE EMF DIRECTIVE ON MRI (RECOMMENDATIONS IN PARAGRAPHS 76 AND 78)

  1.  Progress has been made toward resolving issues relating to the possible impact of the Directive on MRI. In addition to work mentioned above, the following can be noted:

Research

  2.  The Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council have conducted a survey of UK MRI researchers to assess the potential impact of the EU Physical Agents (EMF) Directive on research of clinical and public benefit. This found that research using MRI, as currently practised, could also expose workers above the exposure limit values in the Directive. The full report, once completed, is to be submitted for publication in the Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

  3.  The European Commission have funded additional research intended to complement that funded by HSE. This is due to report later in 2007.

Activity in Europe

  4.  The extension, at the UK's instigation, of the mandate of an existing EMF working group run under the auspices of the European Commission's statutory Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work to discuss this issue. This tripartite body has met several times, and has two UK members. It will make recommendations to the full Committee later in 2007.

  5.  The European Parliament's Employment and Social Affairs Committee discussed the matter on 7 May 2007. This has the effect of raising the profile of the issue, with many more Member States becoming concerned. This has resulted in a number of actions by the European Commission, culminating in two letters, in March and July, from the Director General for Employment and Social Affairs, to all Member States, giving a commitment to take appropriate steps. The EC have indicated they may propose a delay to the transposition deadline for the Directive, perhaps by two to four years, to enable an appropriate solution to be found.

  6.  The European Society of Radiology has organised an "alliance for MRI" which includes around 50 MEPs.

  7.  The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) is reviewing some of the limits, which underpin the Directive.

CONSULTATION (60 AND 70)

  8.  HSE published new internal guidance on consulting stakeholders in March 2007. The document links directly to the Better Regulation Executive's guidance and Code of Practice on Consultation so that HSE's approach is consistent with that of other government departments. The opportunity was taken to re-emphasise a few key points, particularly in the light of lessons learnt from the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee report:

(a)  The importance of early external consultation on the basis of a full stakeholder analysis beyond the customary consultees.

(b)  The need to comply with the Chief Scientific Adviser's Guidelines and involve the Chief Scientist in scientific dossiers, especially if there is conflicting scientific advice.

(c)  The desirability of talking to stakeholders (for example SMEs or professional groups) in addition to the more usual written/internet consultations.

(d)  How HSE reports the results of consultation.

(e)  How to handle disagreements with stakeholders and the importance of flagging these up within HSE and HSC, and making it clear to stakeholders that they can escalate their case.

  9.  The new guidance has been actively promoted throughout HSE, with training for all key staff likely to be engaged in similar consultations.

  10.  The Interdepartmental Liaison Group on Non-ionising Radiation (IDLG NIR) has no executive powers but functions as a means of raising awareness of NIR and electromagnetic fields (EMF) issues that might affect policy. Following the Select Committee report, members the IDLG considered in December 2006 how to review and strengthen its approach. Rather than add more members to its ranks, they chose to consult more widely within their own organisations and include horizon scanning as apart of this consultation. In this way members of the IDLG should therefore be more alert to the various needs of the other parts of their complex organisations as and when issues arise.

MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT OF EUROPEAN NEGOTIATIONS (61)

  11.  New procedures have been put in place to improve the management oversight of all European negotiations, and this is already reaping rewards with better co-ordination within HSE and across Government. This new oversight involves regular senior level reviews of all proposals and, in some instances, the use of senior-level project boards chaired by a HSE Director. These address questions such as the adequacy of plans for stakeholder engagement and consultation, the proper resourcing to ensure the right balance of policy and specialist input, potential difficulties and how can they be avoided, and how the Health and Safety Commission (HSC), Ministers and Parliament will be involved.

ROLE OF THE HSE AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (DH) CHIEF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORS AND MAKING BEST USE OF SCIENCE (40, 54, 60)

  12.  HSE's new Chief Scientific Advisor (CSA), Patrick McDonald, has been instrumental in taking forward a "Making Best Use of Science" project. There are three key strands of this work which relate to the findings of the Select Committee. The first is the establishment of a core Science and Technology Group which will bring together expertise from within HSE and the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL). This will help to ensure that HSE can respond to new and emerging risks in a more co-ordinated and coherent manner; the second is the establishment of two senior scientific advisors to work directly to the CSA with a remit to ensure that HSE's scientific resource meets the current and future challenges of a changing work place; the third is the establishment of a more rigorous and longer term methodology for science planning, which will involve input from HSE's horizon scanning team, and the establishment of an HSE Board Science Sub Group, including external representatives, chaired by the CSA.

  13.  HSE has recognised the need to ensure that both policy makers and scientists understand the requirement for sound, underpinning evidence when formulating new policy. A series of workshops have been run and more are planned, which bring together policy makers and scientists with the aim of developing a mutual understanding of needs and constraints of each party. These have been very well received and a recent external review by Environmental Research Funders' Forum (ERFF) commented on their value.

  14.  The scientific responsibilities in the Department of Health (DH) are three-fold: The DH Chief Scientist is Dr David Harper, the Chief Scientific Adviser is Professor Sally Davies and the Chief Scientific Officer is Professor Sue Hill (NHS Healthcare Science). All three have an interest in the issues identified by the Select Committee recommendations on MRI and the Physical Agents (EMF) Directive and will be kept informed of such cross-boundary issues. Since the Select Committee report was published, the DH Chief Scientist has met with the CSA at the HSE.

REGULATORY IMPACT ASSESSMENTS (PARAGRAPH 32)

  15.  There have been a number of changes to Regulatory Impact Assessments, now called Impact Assessment (IA), procedures in central government and HSE. They include the need for the Chief Economist to provide a submission to the HSE's Chief Executive or HSC's Chair which will need to clarify that the analysis is of sufficiently high standards, a number of additional tests which will be integrated in the IA as and when needed and the attempt to start the IA process as early as possible to ensure a full reflection of all impacts and the scope for the IA to influence policy making.

  16.  In May 2007, the Better Regulation Executive introduced new guidance and an electronic toolkit on when Impact Assessments need to be produced by government departments. HSE formally agreed the introduction of these new guidelines at Board level, and promulgated them through a message to staff and through new better policy making seminars. These seminars, aimed at policy staff, focus on the importance of developing good Impact Assessments through all stages of policy development. They also reinforce, for those involved in EU negotiations, the need to have a well-developed Impact Assessment available prior to the start of EU negotiations and amended, as necessary, to take account of changes to the EU proposal during negotiations.

  17.  HSE has also established a Challenge Panel whose operating criteria include supporting effective handling of emerging EU proposals. In line with UK EU policy, HSE is pressing the European Commission (EC) to honour its commitment in "Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union" COM(2005) 97 final, to produce good quality Impact Assessments for significant proposals. When produced, HSE's negotiators are instructed to challenge poor quality assessments.

October 2007