The Comet 08.12.05

A CONTROVERSIAL phone mast originally installed without planning permission and then allowed to remain temporarily could end up staying where it is for over 18 months.

The mast, situated by the terraces at Hitchin Town football ground in Fishponds Road, was installed by Vodafone in October last year.

The company then applied for permission and was told it could keep the mast there until April 2005.

But the mast has remained at the site since this deadline passed and Vodafone is now asking to be allowed to keep it there for another six months.

The company claims the site is needed to give coverage to west Hitchin and Ickleford until it finds a permanent solution.

If the new planning permission is granted the mast could remain at the football ground until either May or June next year, a move which is likely to prove unpopular with residents of nearby roads.

One resident, of Lancaster Avenue, has already written to North Herts District Council to object to the plan.

The resident insists the mast should have been removed and complains that it is visible from her sitting room and that it is not built on a brownfield site but on common land used for sport.

The matter is due to be discussed by the Hitchin Committee of NHDC next Tuesday.

Councillor Martin Stears, who represents Hitchin Bearton ward on the council, told The Comet: "It's a matter of concern that unless things have changed that we should not see it as a backdoor for something permanent when that's not appropriate.

"We have to look at the whole application from both sides and make a proper judgement on the night."

The Comet contacted Vodafone for a comment but they had not responded by the time the paper went to press.

The Citizen, Gloucester

09:30 - 08 December 2005

City planners have been urged to make a stand against the number of phone masts being set up in Gloucester.

Two applications were put forward at a meeting of the city council's planning committee on Tuesday evening. Both were submitted by telecommunications giant O2 (UK) Ltd, to erect 15 metre tall structures in Painswick Road.

The council can only turn down plans if it can prove the siting and appearance of the mast is unreasonable.

No health issues can be considered in any application and, if the council rejects a proposal, it could face large costs if the decision is overturned on appeal.

The first planned mast, on a grass verge outside Saintbridge RFC in Matson, was granted permission after councillors admitted they could not find a planning reason to reject the proposals.

However, the plans for the second mast, on a grass verge on land between Painswick Road and Briar Lane in Abbeydale, met with more opposition.

City actress Jean Carlin, who lives near the proposed site, spoke against the plans.

She said: "Soon people will not even be able to talk to each other, before too long everyone will just walk around speaking into these stupid little machines.

"This is a serious matter and I believe it is up to people like you to get the ball rolling and to say enough is enough."

Coun Andrew Gravells, who represents the Abbeydale area on the city council, also spoke against the plans.

He said: "I am upset by this application. The site slopes quite significantly and the impact of placing a 15 metre tall mast here would be massive upon many people in Abbeydale."

Coun Gravells added that he believed a more suitable site away from nearby houses could be found for the mast.

Coun Mary Smith, a member of the committee, agreed, saying: "We need to send a clear message that putting a mast in the middle of a residential area is not acceptable when just 100 yards up the road the houses are far more scattered."

The committee decided to refuse planning permission on the grounds that the mast would spoil the amenity of the surrounding area and would be situated on one of the main approaches to the city.

http://www.who.int/features/2005/health_survey/en/
http://www.who.int/features/2005/health_survey/form/en/index.html

I have received this - I think we should all contact WHO and let them know just what we think of them!

Cheers

Sylvia

--------

WHO, EMF, Electromagnetic Radiation and Mobile Phones
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1194586/

From Phil Watts

Carriers French mobile operators fined a massive €534m
by Guy Daniels - 1/12/2005 12:23:42

It has been a bad morning for France's mobile operators. Earlier today, they received the news that the country's competition authority (Conseil de la Concurrence) has decided to fine Orange, SFR and Bouygues Telecom a record amount of €534 million for market collusion practices between 1997 and 2003. France Telecom's Orange takes the brunt of the fines, with €256 million, whilst SFR is fined €220 million and Bouygues Telecom a more modest €58 million.

The competition authority says the French operators engaged in two illegal practices: they exchanged confidential information - about the number of new clients and the number of cancellations - during the period; and they agreed between themselves the market share for each party during 2000 and 2002. The Conseil de la Concurrence considers that these practices have damaged the economy and altered the intensity of the competition between the operators.

France Telecom has already announced it is going to appeal against this decision, which it says is "based on events that are now long past" and which "has been handed down despite months of actions of all kinds seeking to discredit the telecommunications sector in France".

It says that the ruling could have a serious impact on public confidence in one of the most dynamic sectors of the country's economy, one which has invested more than €60 billion over ten years and employees some 250,000 people.

"This ruling is based on the existence of an exchange of information among the three mobile operators, and on allegedly concerted practises that led to a freeze in market share between 2000 and 2002,"says the official France Telecom response. "The idea that it would be possible to control a market of roughly 40 million customers sourcing their products from 20,000 points of sale, is totally unrealistic. During the period in question, 20 per cent of customers changed operators each year on average. In addition, half of the points of sale distributing mobile products and services do not belong to operators, but are independent distributors or part of leading retail groups, constantly putting the offerings of the different mobile operators into competition with one another."

Orange France adds that during the 1997 and 2003 period, customers benefited from roughly 20 per cent decrease in mobile telephony prices. Needless to say, it will appeal the decision.

"This is really bad news for the French operators, for two reasons," said Vincent Poulbere, Senior Consultant with Ovum. "First, because of the record amount of the fine (from 14.6-18.3 per cent of the operators' net profit in 2004); and second, because of the bad press resulting from this decision and the damage it will do to the operators' brands and credibility."

Ovum said they were surprised by the competition authority's findings (published on its website) about how operators exchanged confidential information and agreed on market shares. However, they also note that this isn't the end of the story. Not only will the decision will be appealed by the operators, but the customer association UFC Que Choisir - which lodged the original complaint - plans to launch a US-style class action suit against the operators.

Tues 6/12/2005

From: Eileen O'Connor
eileen@smokestackltd.co.uk
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 11:55:57
Subject: TV show about masts - Tues 6/12/2005

Phone-mast TV programme on this Tuesday, well worth viewing, it is a repeated programme which exposes the corruption behind the phone mast industry.

I was involved with this programme, you catch a glimpse of me and Amanda Wesley, although don't blink.

3 Investigates - Phone masts, BBC 3, 7pm. Boldmere in Sutton Coldfield.


Kind Regards

Eileen O'Connor
Trustee - EM Radiation Research Trust http://www.radiationresearch.org
Founder - SCRAM http://www.scram.uk.com

--------

Please check time date of broadcast, The daily Express supplement yesterday gave the day as Tuesday, but the programme listings with the remote control give the broadcast as being on Monday 5th December. It is in the programme entitled "3 investigates" and gos out at 7.00pm.

Regards, Roy

--------

Thanks Roy

Looks like a rescheduling since RT was printed:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/listings/index.shtml?day=monday&service_id=4288

Monday 7pm according to BBC website.


Andy

--------

BBC 3 phone mast programme

From: Eileen O'Connor
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 13:10:22 -0000

A few campaigners have contacted me today after phoning the BBC to complain. They have been informed that the programme on 'phone masts' didn't go out last night due to legal reasons but wouldn't tell them why. It did go out on Monday night on BBC 3!! However most people didn't realise it had been changed including me.

We need to persuade the BBC to put it on BBC 1 for everyone to view.

Website to complain in writing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint_step1.shtml or phone the BBC complaints line 08700 100222

The schedule was changed but not in time for the Sunday TV guides.

I wonder why?

OFCOM swallowed up the British Broadcasting Standards Authority so they also regulate the BBC !! First put it out on BBC3 and make sure no one sees it rescheduled! I hope I'm wrong; this business does make you suspicious!!

--------

Thanks Eileen.

Complaint emailed to the BBC this morning.

John Elliott

--------

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxx
Sent: 08 December 2005 19:55
To: BBC Three Subject: Re: Feedback - Suggestion - - BBC3 investigates


Dear BBC 3 Tanks you for your reply

Several friends who do have BBC 3 have complained to me that the programme wasn't on. It turns out that in all the printed programme schedules it was scheduled to be shown on Tuesday night. It must have been changed at the last moment to Monday. This means that even if people did have BBC3 they probably missed it anyway.

Could you tell me if this is normal practice to reschedule at short notice for an earlier date?

It seems rather strange and given the difficulties of getting any stories on this subject into any media at all one does begin to wonder especially since the British Broadcasting Standards Authority have been swallowed up by OFCOM who now 'regulate' the BBC.

OFCOM also license the mobile phone industry. They have received £22.5 billion from the sale of the licences to the phone companies for the 3G network and in the agreement have stipulated that the companies must get the masts up by the end of 2007.

One does wonder?

Would you be so kind as to let me know the reason for the change in schedule at short notice and in the light of this give serious conideration to rescheduling the programme onto BBC 1 or2 (if OFCOM will let you!)

Yours

xxxxx


Dear xxxxx

Thank you for taking the time to contact the BBC.

Unfortunately, in broadcasting, schedules are often subject to change. We understand your concerns and have passed your email on to our schedulers in the hope they will give us a reason for the change. As soon as we have a response, we'll pass it on to you.

Kind regards,

BBC Three Web Team
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/

--------

CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER
http://www.omega-news.info/bbc_3_phone_mast_programme.htm

Many former advice line callers update Mast Sanity on their progress and some help to spread the word in their areas quite sucessfully. Groups are joining up and some, like this area, broadcast relevant info whenever they can. People power at its best.

Sandi


The Editor
Gorgie/Dalry Gazette
14th November 2005

Dear Sir

PHONE MAST DROP-IN

Some readers may have missed the significance of the above item on page 8 of the October Gazette, amongst Fountainbridge Library news. There are very good reasons why people living in the vicinity should be alert to the possibility of a phone mast on the roof of the library. Not least is the building’s architectural merit and its history as a Nelson Hall, gifted for the benefit of the people. What would be the visual impact of a rooftop phone mast installation? More worrying is the fact that very little research has been done here into the health effects of microwave exposure. The sort of radiation you get from mobile phone masts and base stations has not been scientifically investigated while the sale of operating licenses has been pushed ahead. Yet residents near masts are increasingly reporting a variety of health effects, including serious illnesses.

Sweden has already acknowledged that people can suffer from exposure to electromagnetic fields and that this condition is not psychosomatic. In July this year over 170 doctors wrote to their Prime Minister in Germany imploring him to take action over the proliferation of phone masts. In their letter to Edmund Stoiber they said “many people have become ill with a characteristic combination of symptoms, at exposure levels far below the guideline limits.” The symptoms include sleep disturbance, headaches, depression, dizziness, sinusitis, palpitations and nausea. Emissions form DECT (cordless) phones are also associated with these symptoms and with concentration disturbance.

This has been known for some time and a range of protective products – paints, foils, screening net curtains etc. are now available, as people become more aware and anti mast campaigns increase. Even the Health Protection Agency (HPA) has acknowledged that increasing numbers of people in the UK suffer from electro sensitivity and that Britain should follow Sweden in recognising it as a physical impairment. (See Sunday Times 11th September and Daily Mail 12th September 2005). Their report has since been watered down to be almost meaningless, for reasons that may not be too hard to grasp.

Adults at least understand enough to speak out when new symptoms arise but what about our children? Can they explain? Will they grow up thinking this is the norm? There are far too many masts and far too few answers. Find out more from http://www.mastsanity.org and http://www.tetrawatch.net websites. In the meantime put the brakes on yet another mast in this area.

--------

Open letter to Edmund Stoiber, Prime Minister, Germany
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/838705/

02 in the Lincolnshire Echo 29.11 05 and a reader’s reply

O2 have applied for permission to erect a 15m monopole on the site.

These are designed to be less visually intrusive than other types of phone mast because they are thinner.

An O2 spokesman said the mast would be safe.

"Our mobile phones and base stations are designed to operate within international exposure guidelines on radio wave emissions.

"These guidelines include a substantial safety margin to assure the protection of everyone, regardless of age and health.

"Measurements by regulators in Britain and Germany show our masts and base stations operate well below these guidelines, often by hundreds or thousands of times."

Omega read "Base Stations, operating within strict national and international Guidelines, do not present a Health Risk?" under: http://omega.twoday.net/stories/771911/

Lincoln City Council can object to the mast application only on grounds of appearance.


A reader’s reply

The current 'guidelines' used by operators only base health effects on thermal heating (amount tissue is heated), they do not take into account non-thermal effects, and it is these that scientists across the world (including the UK governments own) claim can cause adverse health effects after long-term exposure, especially to the frail and children. It certainly isn't scaremongering, the head of the radiological protection board advised mobile operators to consult with schools, even though guidelines were met, why? Because there is a risk with long-term exposure to the new technology. The reason new phone masts are now being brought into urban areas is to implement a new 3G system to enable users to connect to the internet and download video/music. 3G has not taken off after 5 years and people are content with their 2G voice/text phones, but the operators have been given a deadline (2007) to rollout the 3G network or pay a penalty. So this is the real reason we are seeing so many more applications for phone masts. Very few want the 3G service since it cannot meet the download speeds as first thought and a change in technology is needed. Until scientists know one way or another we should not allow corporate greed to override public health concerns from a product that was born out of greed and not need.Until then, we should all adopt a precautionary approach and ensure these masts are placed well away from residential areas and schools.

Mr. Galloway, Pendle

By Pete Henshaw

This is Local London

CAMPAIGNERS fighting against T-Mobile's plans to erect a mobile phone mast just 200 yards from Aldersbrook Primary School in Wanstead are today facing proposals for a further three masts Up to 14 new phone masts could go up in Wanstead and Woodford, including nine in the Wanstead area, according to new plans tabled by mobile giants T-Mobile, O2, Orange, Vodafone and H3G.

The annual roll-out plan is a list of existing sites, sites where masts have been granted permission but not yet built and proposed new sites.

It shows that at the moment, Wanstead and Snaresbrook have 15 masts. Another two have been granted permission and nine more are proposed.

Among the masts granted approval is the T-Mobile site in Aldersbrook Road, just 200 yards from Aldersbrook Primary School, which campaigner Elizabeth Canavan and her supporters have been fighting against.

The new list deals Mrs Canavan's campaign a blow as Vodafone, O2 and Orange are all proposing news masts in Aldersbrook Road.

Mrs Canavan said she was dismayed but determined to continue the fight after hearing the news.

She said: "I did not know about the Vodafone or O2 proposals, so now there are potentially four masts on that stretch."

Mrs Canavan said the decision by the Planning Inspectorate to allow the T-Mobile mast - against Redbridge Council's wishes - has set a precedent and encouraged the other companies.

She said: "We really want to open a dialogue with the council and the Corporation of London (which owns Wanstead Flats).

"We want to speak to these companies and get a proper solution.

"What we're calling for is a sensible precautionary approach.

"We're not accepting this risk to our children and community. This is not precautionary, they're flying in the face of precaution."

Elsewhere, Woodford Green has ten masts with another five sites which have been granted permission and no new proposals, while in South Woodford there are nine masts with one site having been given permission and no new proposals.

Mrs Canavan said that if a proliferation of masts was allowed then more and more campaign groups would spring up around the area.

Proposed mast sites included in the list are: l T-Mobile Meadow Walk, Snaresbrook; Saxonby House, High Street, Wanstead; l Vodafone Next to Bowling Green Aldersbrook Road, Wanstead; Gordon Road, Snaresbrook l Orange Blake Hall Road, Wanstead; Aldersbrook Road, Wanstead; Wanstead Tube station l O2 Bowls Club, Aldersbrook Road, Wanstead; Courtney Hotel, Aldersbrook Road, Wanstead l HG3 no new proposed sites in Wanstead or Woodford The full list of all Redbridge sites is available on the Redbridge Council website, where the introduction states: "These sites will still have to be submitted for consideration by the council, either as prior approval sites or as a planning application."

The website address is
http://www.redbridge.gov.uk/planning/telcom2005.cfm phenshaw@london.newsquest.co.uk

11:00am Sunday 27th November 2005

http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Nov2005/2285.htm

--------

27 november 2005 - An activist against UMTS (3G) is ready to chain himself to an antenna installation fence tomorrow morning. He says his group will be satisfied only when UMTS is absolutely banned from the town of Spijkenisse near Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Monday morning operator Orange plans to install three UMTS antennas in a power pylon, about 75 metres from the nearest dwellings. The workers will meet with a crowd of people. "We call them by flyers throughout the neighbourhood", says Bertus van Drongelen. "To help and prevent the installation of these antennas. If the workers do not leave, one of us will chain himself to the fence." The activists prevented the installation before, in October.

Alex Swinkels, Bertus van Drongelen and Gerard de Kimpe are not just worried about the UMTS-antennas. They know the permanent radiation of mobile communication can have terrifying health effects. Some time ago they visited the occupants of the top floor of the Marrewijkflat, an apartment building in Spijkenisse. "80 Percent of them have severe health complaints, from insomnia to cancer", says Van Drongelen. On top of the Marrewijkflat are several antennas for mobile communication.

The same problems were found at the 5th and 6th floor elswehere. Opposite are antennas for mobile communication, on top of a four story apartment building. "Insomnia, headache, nausea and a general feeling of sickness", the occupants report. Some of them are urinating blood. The physicians and specialists can not find any known disease or abnormality. When the occupants leave the premises, they feel better. Back home the sickness returns.

Therefore, the three activists are convinced of the health effects of the radiation. "It is impossible to have a radiation-free town. The problem of radiation pollution is too complex and it is too late to stop the other antennas", says Van Drongelen. "But at least we want a town without UMTS. The citizens have to be made aware of the radiation hazard." According to scientists, the radiation of mobile communication causes toxic effects.

The activists concentrate on all UMTS-antennas in Spijkenisse. The town council is behind them. The council decided two weeks ago not to grant new antenna mast permits anymore. Councillor Gerrit van Buuren asked operator Orange to respect the wish of the people and cancel the installation. "We have the right permit and documents, we don't see any reason to stop", says an Orange spokesman.

Sources:

http://www.ad.nl/rotterdam/voorneputten/article69465.ece (Algemeen Dagblad, newspaper)
interview by telephone with Bertus van Drongelen article in local newspaper The Botlek, November 2, 2005
http://www.stopumts.nl/pdf/motie2_spijkenisse.pdf and
http://www.stopumts.nl/pdf/motie1_spijkenisse.pdf (council decisions)

--------

A Militant of Group STS (Spijkenisse Tegen Straling) connected against an installation of Orange UMTS - Holland
http://www.next-up.org/divers/image_semaine1.php

by Claire Metcalfe

Ryedale Gazette and Herald Yorkshire

Crowds of villagers who protested against a mobile phone mast near their homes in Sheriff Hutton have vowed to continue fighting until it has gone.

More than 130 residents showed up at the weekend with placards and signs to express their anger at phone company Orange for erecting the 15- metre high mast in Dasket Hill without prior warning.

And they have held Ryedale District Council (RDC) to account too, for administrative errors which allowed the mast to be built.

At a meeting on Monday, the Sheriff Hutton Protest Group demanded answers from Gary Housden, RDC's development control manager.

Apologising, he said that a letter sent by RDC to the parish council in January, informing it of the mast application and asking for a response, failed to arrive. When RDC got in touch to ask why the response was taking so long, this failure came to light and a second letter was issued.

The parish council responded promptly to say it was opposed to the mast, but the delay had brought the decision "perilously close" to its 56-day deadline for lodging an objection by law.

Then, due to an error in the way the council's computer was programmed, the expiry date of the application notice was incorrectly calculated by a day, meaning that RDC was one day late in issuing a response to Orange 's request. "It sticks in my throat that this has happened, but it has happened," said Mr Housden. "There were two mistakes from an administrative point of view. One mistake we could have lived with, but it took it to the wire and went over by a day, but that is not representative of the development control work of this council."

He is now taking legal advice as to whether the council has any enforcement power over Orange thanks to two technicalities.

The first is that Orange did not place notification of plans on the site, as is its responsibility, and the second is that the plans said the mast would be a moss green colour, and it is currently galvanized steel.

If it has no power, the council will approach Orange to discuss moving the mast, possibly even offering a financial incentive.

But the meeting heard that North Yorkshire County Council's highways authority had already been in touch with Orange to offer another grass verge away from the village, and it declined. The highways authority has to let it build on verges, like other service providers such as gas and electric companies.

Penny Bean, chairman of the parish council, said there were landowners willing to accommodate the mast, adding: "But then Orange would have to pay rent."

Now residents are looking further afield for support in lobbying Orange to remove the mast.

They are planning to write to the chief executive of the company until they get a response.

Ryedale's MP, John Greenway, has also promised to write to the company

He said: "I've come to the conclusion, having been given all the facts, that that the district and county councils should ask Orange to move it and I'm prepared to support them by writing to Orange direct myself.

"Given the real hostility, I think the responsible thing for Orange to do now would be to agree for the mast to be moved."

After the meeting, a member of the protest group, Linda Murphy, who lives 85 metres away from the mast in Cornborough Road , said: "We've decided that we really need to take the fight to Orange because we really don't have very much faith that the council can do much for us.

"By consensus, we really want to name and shame Orange and we are going to hold further meetings about how to go about that."

Orange spokesperson Duncan McGraw said: "As far as Orange is concerned, we've not had contact (about suggestions of where to move the mast) either from the council or residents, but we would look at any suggestion by the public and council and assess them on their merits."

Updated: 14:27 Wednesday, November 23, 2005