---

18 Jan 2005 : Column 868W—continued

Local Elections

Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost to public funds was of (a) producing and (b) mailing the manifesto booklet for the (i) 2000 and (ii) 2004 Greater London Authority elections. [207918]

Mr. Raynsford: Following late amendments made in the Other Place to the Greater London Authority Act 1999, the Government was required to provide Mayoral and Assembly candidates with free distribution of electoral material during the 2000 elections. This set a precedent for future GLA elections and the provision was therefore included in the 2004 Election Rules.

In 2000, the total cost to public funds of producing and distributing the Mayoral election booklet was £1.3 million. Of that, £850,000 was for postage.

In 2004 the Greater London Returning Officer was responsible for planning and organising the GLA election. He has indicated that the public cost of the design and printing of all election publications was £1.012 million. Postage costs came to almost £521,000.

Local Government Reform

Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the timescale is for publication of further consultation papers on reform of local government. [207932]

Mr. Raynsford: Last July, the Government launched a debate on the future of local government with the publication of "The future of local government: Developing a 10 year vision". As part of this debate, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister intends to publish discussion papers on neighbourhood engagement and local leadership at the end of January. We expect to publish a further paper on the performance framework in the spring.

Mobile Phone Masts

Chris Ruane: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what plans he has to review the advice on the location of mobile phone masts near schools; and if he will make a statement. [209296]

Yvette Cooper: Mobile phone mast and base station developments near schools are subject to the normal planning regulations in place throughout England, unless exempted by the regulations set out in Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (GPDO). The planning
 
18 Jan 2005 : Column 869W
 
arrangements for telecommunications developments were significantly strengthened in 2001 and include improved requirements for consulting local people about mast proposals. The changes to the GPDO were underpinned by revised guidance, set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8, Telecommunications. The changes to the planning guidance also underlined that school governors must be consulted on all proposals for new masts on or near a school or college. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is currently considering the NRPB report on Mobile Phones and Health 2004 and will respond once we have considered them fully.

Chris Ruane: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what guidelines he has issued on consultation with (a) schools and (b) the public on the location of mobile phone masts; and how many applications have (i) conformed and (ii) failed to conform to the guidelines since their inception. [209297]

Yvette Cooper: A Code of Best Practice on Mobile Network Development has been produced to provide clear and practical advice to ensure the delivery of significantly better and more effective communication and consultation between operators, local authorities and local people. It provides more detailed advice than is contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8 on Telecommunications (PPG8) about how local communities and particularly schools and colleges should be consulted in relation to telecommunications developments. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has commissioned a study to assess the impact that the Code has had since its introduction, how local authorities have implemented the Code and how the public perceives its operation.

The specific information requested is not held centrally by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and could provide it only at disproportionate cost.

Chris Ruane: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many mobile phone masts in England are located within a 200 m radius of a school, broken down by local authority area; and if he will make a statement. [209298]

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister does not hold the information requested centrally and could provide it only at a disproportionate cost.

Chris Ruane: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the impact on house prices of the erection of mobile phone masts; and if he will make a statement. [209300]

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has made no assessment of the impact on house prices of the erection of mobile phone masts.

In respect of potential impacts of proposed telecommunications development on property values, PPG 1 notes that it is not for the planning system to protect the private interests of one person against the activities of another. Although in a particular case considerations of public interest may serve to protect private interests, the material question is not whether a particular development would cause financial or other loss to owners and occupiers of the neighbouring property, but whether the proposal would have a
 
18 Jan 2005 : Column 870W
 
detrimental effect on the locality generally, and on amenities that ought, in the public interest, to be protected.

Glenda Jackson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will institute an immediate review of the planning process for the siting of mobile phone masts as called for in the National Radiological Protection Board report. [208966]

Yvette Cooper: The Government have welcomed the timely review undertaken by the National Radiological Protection Board which was published on 11 January. The report made many recommendations about mobile phones and health, including two relating to planning procedures. We are studying the recommendations and will respond once we have considered them fully.

Glenda Jackson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will revise planning procedures with regard to mobile telephone masts to enable local authorities to consider possible health implications. [208967]

Yvette Cooper: The Government are carefully considering the judgment on 13 November 2003 by the Court of Appeal in the case of "First Secretary of State v. T-Mobile and others" and the report entitled "Mobile Phones and Health 2004" published by the National Radiological Protection Board on 11 January which both make reference to the extent to which local planning authorities can take health concerns into account in decisions about the siting of mobile phone base stations.

MOD Land

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 15 December 2004, Official Report, column 1119W, on MOD land, when the first audit of the arrangement will take place; and if he will make the results publicly available. [209074]

Keith Hill: There are no separate auditing arrangements planned for the framework agreement announced in November 2004 between English Partnerships and Defence Estates on surplus Defence land. The agreement will be monitored and reviewed annually as part of these organisations normal operations. Separate monitoring arrangements will be established for any project arising from the agreement.

Planning

Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the average time taken to process a planning appeal by the Planning Inspectorate was in (a) 1997 and (b) the latest year for which figures are available. [207931]

Keith Hill: The average time taken to process a planning appeal in England between the 1 January and 31 December 1997 was 24.0 weeks. During this period 14,455 appeals were received.

In the period 1 January to 31 December 2004 the average time taken to process a planning appeal was 25.7 weeks. During this period 25,237 appeals were received.
 
18 Jan 2005 : Column 871W
 

Bob Russell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will give guidance to planning authorities not to determine planning applications related to earlier applications which are the subject of an ombudsman investigation; and if he will make a statement. [209267]

Keith Hill: It is for the local planning authority to consider how to deal with the planning proposals it receives, including any repeat applications, and to take appropriate advice on the facts and circumstances of individual cases where necessary. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister sees no need to issue general guidance on this point.

---