In Yasmin Skelt v First Secretary of State and Others (26 September 2003), the High Court ruled that ICNIRP certification must not be used to dismiss public health objections. The ruling found that the planning inspector had acted unlawfully by failing to give adequate weight to health concerns, based solely on PPG8 paragraph 30.
This case was highlighted in a Westminster Hall debate (28 January 2004), reinforcing that ICNIRP certification cannot override the duty to properly consider public health evidence.
Legal case 2003 against an phone mast
Claimant Yasmin Skelt v The Secretary of State for The Environment Transport and The Regions
The Secretary of State proposed to concede this case on account of the Planning Inspector’s “failure to adequately consider the health concerns of the claimant in his decision letter”. It was further proposed that the Secretary of State will pay the costs for the case.
From Mast Sanity
ICNIRP Certification is NOT Enough – Yasmin Skelt vs The First Secretary of State and Three Bridges District Council and Orange PCS Limited
Government Planning Policy Guidance on masts, PPG8 (Para 98) states: “… it is the Government’s firm view that the planning system is not the place for determining health safeguards. … In the Government’s view, if a proposed mobile phone base station meets the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines for public exposure it should not be necessary for a local planning authority, in processing an application for planning permission or prior approval to consider further the health aspects and concerns about them”. But a Planning Inspector who by all accounts followed that advice to the letter failed in his statutory duty – according to the Deputy Prime Minister.
An official Government Planning Guideline that is at variance with the expressed view of the Deputy Prime Minister (and final arbiter of planning issues in the UK) has no place in the planning process and should be withdrawn immediately. Until then the self-contradictory stance of the Government on this issue is untenable, making a mockery of the Democratic Process in respect of mobile phone masts.