Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:648;Page:17249] 
11.  
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Is he confident that a cellphone tower built next to a playcentre or kindergarten would pose no risk to the health of the children who spend time at that centre; if so why? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Associate Minister of Health) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Health 
: Yes; I am advised that there is a current scientific consensus that exposure to cellphone towers would not constitute any quantifiable risk from radio frequency fields. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Is it not actually the case that he cannot be confident because there are in fact significant concerns about the health risks of long-term exposure to radio frequency fields especially for children and including serious clusters of health effects for people living near cellphone towers and given this uncertainty why will he not recommend a precautionary approach that does not compromise the safety of our children and prohibit the location of telecommunications towers near schools and preschools? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: The evidence is not conclusive at all. I am not a scientist but the Ministry of Health monitors all the research and convenes an expert advisory group to comment on findings of any research and on whether the ministry’s policies need to be reviewed. We are doing everything that we need to in this area and we take on board any new evidence as it comes to us. 
Lesley Soper 
: Has the Minister received any reports on exposure levels from New Zealand cell sites? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: Yes. The Ministry of Health’s measurements show that radio frequency fields from cell sites are normally one-hundredth of the limit recommended in the standard. The limits and the standard are consistent with international best practice and are at least 50 times lower than the level at which health effects might occur. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Is it not the case that our standard is hundreds of times higher than many countries including China Austria and Switzerland; is it not also the case that any New Zealander could wake up and discover that a 22-metre telecommunications tower had been erected next door overnight and that ordinary New Zealanders have absolutely no say or any rights to object to a structure being built next to their homes or their preschools; and what will the Government’s response be tomorrow to a group of Nelson parents who are bringing to the Prime Minister their video message entitled “Dear Helen Clark” in which they express their concerns about their children’s safety in the light of a proposal by Telecom to build a telecommunications tower next to two preschools in Nelson? 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: I am aware of the Nelson situation. I think that the tower is next to one preschool. I understand that Telecom has decided not to proceed with that in the short term. Telecom is talking with people. There is normally through the Resource Management Act an extensive process of local consultation. There are many views on these proposals. Although there are other standards in other countries we are using the best independent international advice in this area and I am aware that although the other countries have slightly different standards it in fact makes no practical difference in any way to the way cell sites operate or to the potential health effects of any exposure. 
Sue Kedgley 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I am just wondering whether the Minister would like to think about his answer because he made a very inaccurate statement. He said that normally extensive consultation takes place in erecting these 22-metre cellphone towers when in fact there is no requirement for any consultation whatsoever so I think the Minister— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I think the Minister did address the question. 
Sue Kedgley 
: I seek leave to table details of two examples of 22-metre cellphone towers. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.