Mobile phone base stations

From time to time I receive complaints from residents in different localities protesting against mobile phone base stations erected on rooftops in residential areas.

To date, there are already several base stations on rooftops across the country and, with the upcoming launch of new mobile phone companies, they may well be set to increase.

The people who complain to me raise different concerns. Primarily public health concerns but also the impact on the aesthetics in the area, especially in village cores, and the impact on the value of their own property.

One such complaint reached me only last week from a group of residents in Lija, my home village, regarding a base station being erected in the area.

In the light of the repeated concerns on public health, especially when base stations are erected in residential areas, I raised this matter directly with the European Commission in a parliamentary question.

Replying to my question only last July, EU Commissioner Androula Vassiliou said in no uncertain terms that "the available scientific studies on the potential negative health effects of electro magnetic field (EMF) emissions do not show evidence that mobile phone base station antennas usage in residential area or in a non-urbanised zone cause adverse health effects".

The commissioner went on to state that "the recommendations of the international organisations, like the World Health Organisation (WHO), are continuously monitored by the Commission and taken into consideration. The WHO states that 'considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF (radio frequency) signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects'. Recent surveys have shown that the RF exposures from base stations range from 0.002 per cent to two per cent of the levels of international exposure guidelines, depending on a variety of factors such as the proximity to the antenna and the surrounding environment".

The Commission added that "in the same vein, the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) has stated in its latest opinion in 2007 that 'no health effect has been consistently demonstrated at exposure levels below existing exposure guidelines for the general public'".

The Commission concluded that it is taking the public concerns on electromagnetic fields (EMF) exposure very seriously and even funds research to further fill gaps in knowledge.

In an earlier reply, the Commission had stated that measurements performed in various member states have demonstrated that the level to which the public is exposed is below the values recommended by the Council (normally by a factor of 100 to 100,000). It stated that, in general, the safety zone around masts is in the order of four metres (for a typical low-power urban area base station) to 10 metres (rural area high-power base station) in the horizontal direction and less than a metre in the vertical direction. Exposure drops with the square of the distance, which explains the low exposure levels measured in practice. Interestingly, it concluded that exposure levels of mobile phones and, for instance, those close to broadcast transmitters, many of which have been in operation for many years, are much higher.

Let me come to the issue of aesthetics and planning considerations.

The EU has no competence to regulate this matter from a planning point of view and it is therefore up to the national authorities to do so, in our case Mepa.

It appears that under current Mepa rules, no planning permit application is required to install a base station. A mere notification suffices. It seems that mobile phone companies simply enter into a private agreement with the owner of the building on top of which the antenna is erected, often at a lucrative fee. This procedure seems to preclude neighbours from filing objections, contrary to normal planning applications.

Yet, given the rapid proliferation of base stations, I am not convinced that this laissez faire approach is adequate, especially when stations are erected just metres away from residences, when they are erected in old village cores and when the area is already serviced by other base stations. Perhaps Mepa, in conjunction with MCA, should look into this matter further and, in particular, into the sharing of base stations among different companies if this is technically possible, if only to keep the number of stations to a minimum.

Whereas base stations have become a fact of life and there is no going back on mobile technology, I think it is important for national authorities to be more sensitive to residents' concerns.

Readers who would like to ask questions to be answered in this column can send an e-mail, identifying themselves, to contact@simonbusuttil.eu or through www.simonbusuttil.eu.

Dr Busuttil is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament.