Sep 13 2005

icBirmingham

Britain's biggest mobile phone operators have hit back at Birmingham City Council's attempt to block the siting of telecommunications masts close to schools and hospitals.

The Mobile Phone Operators Association accused the council of behaving " disingenuously" by suggesting that the companies were not opposed to a ban on masts at sensitive sites.

The council's stance, which was approved by the cabinet yesterday, conflicts with a Government ruling that there are no health risks attached to mobile phone masts and that there should be no no-go areas for antennae.

Omega here are health risks attached to mobile phone masts. See under:
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wissenschaft+zu+Mobilfunk/ and
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cancer+Cluster
http://www.buergerwelle.de/body_science.html

Norman Gillan, a spokesman for the MOA, said his organisation was not properly consulted by the council, which could as a result be in breach of its statutory duties.

Mr Gillan, representing Hutchison 3G UK, O2, Orange, T-mobile and Vodafone, said the council's stance on phone masts contradicted advice laid down by the Secretary of State and was opposed by the MOA.

"There is clear guidance on issues surrounding health and the council have decided to disregard this advice," Mr Gillan said.

The MOA is particularly concerned at remarks by Mick Wilkes, chairman of the council's main scrutiny committee, who said it was significant that the mobile phone companies had not lodged an official objection to the sensitive sites policy.

Coun Wilkes (Lib Dem Hall Green) said the operators had expressed support for sensitive sites policy when it was discussed at a scrutiny hearing. They appeared to have changed their minds since then.

"I wonder if they have been given a nudge by someone?," he added.

Coun Wilkes said: "What we are trying to achieve is a settlement in the best interests of all concerned including the phone companies and the citizens of Birmingham."

The council faces a wait now to hear whether the Government will intervene, forcing it to scrap the policy and allow phone masts to be sited near to schools and hospitals.

By Nic Brunetti
Bucks Free Press

RESIDENTS are calling on council chiefs to reject a new application for a controversial phone mast and end their year-long battle with T-Mobile.

As reported in June, opponents to the mast in Wycombe Road, Marlow, won their fight against the planning decision that allowed the mast to go up just metres from their homes.

They submitted the case for judicial review but settled out of court with Wycombe District Council, who agreed to a consent order that quashed the planning decision.

However, the order meant that the mast would only be taken down if a new application by the mobile phone giants was unsuccessful.

And now T-Mobile has submitted a full planning application with residents promising a full rally of opposition before the final decision is made.

David Reynolds, leader of the residents, said he hoped the council would take a closer look at plans this time around.

This includes legal arguments in the original case, where the council admitted it did not contact Great Marlow School about the mast, despite a Government report saying that radiation beams of the "greatest intensity" strike the ground between 50 and 200 metres.

Great Marlow is only 150 metres from the mast which was put up last year but has yet to be activated.

Mr Reynolds said: "We hope that the council will see sense and refuse the application so the mobile phone mast can be put somewhere more appropriate."

Mr Reynolds said he is still awaiting payment for his legal costs, which the council were ordered to pay as part of the consent order.

The council has since said Great Marlow will be contacted over the new application after a review of notifications policy.

As the new submission is a full planning application, it means there is no time deadline for a decision which was previously the case with a General Permitted Development Order. These give telecom companies the right to have masts approved if a decision is not made within 56 days but this cannot happen this time.

Mr Reynolds said he believed this would allow greater scope for objections and a better chance for councillors to consider residents' views.

A T-mobile spokesman said: "As a result of the consent order issued, T-Mobile has submitted a full planning application to the local planning authority."

Sep 13 2005

icSurrey

By Joan Mulcaster

A COUNCILLOR is so convinced it is possible to manage without a mobile phone she refuses to have one.

Jan Mason, the vice-chairman of Epsom and Ewell Council's planning committee, voted with other members to refuse planning permission for the 20 metre mast in Court Recreation Ground - a decision applauded by protesters in the public gallery.

She said: "I have chosen not to have one on moral grounds, but I should think most people in this room do have one."

Officers had recommended approval of the proposed structure - a timber clad, green-painted attempt at tree-like camouflage.

The committee turned the plan down as being unacceptable in a public park.

But both councillors and planners agreed that the march of the masts into Epsom and Ewell and other UK environments was not going to go away.

And Mrs Mason pointed out that, although it would have been the first in a recreation ground, it was not the first in a public open space.

She said: "There is one in Horton Park Golf Club."

The near 1,000-name petition and scores of letters from roads round the popular recreation ground represented so far the largest protest ever against a mast in the borough.

Mum-to-be Jane Case and Liberal Democrat councillor Paul Green finished off weeks of campaigning with an impassioned plea to the Thursday night committee that the mast should be rejected on visual and health grounds in a park where the greatest users were toddlers in Court Rec's playground.

Although protesters went home happy, they do not know yet if the five networks due to be served by the multi-company mast will appeal to the Department of Environment.

Planning officers pointed out that, with usage of mobiles ever increasing, the masts were unavoidable.

The non-voting Liberal Democrat councillor Lionel Blackman suggested more research should be done on the aesthetics, to find out what other countries were doing to disguise them as trees.

He said: "This could take the edge off the unpleasant aspects of masts."

http://openpr.com/news/253.html

--------

Mast Sanity Director of Scientific Studies Ingrid Dickenson has now arranged for blood tests to be carried out at a German medical laboratory. This blood test will establish whether a patient is affected by electro magnetic pollution from either power lines, mobile phone masts, mobiles, DECT and other wireless technology and/or environmental pollutants. Blood will be collected through a laboratory in London. In the light of the recent admission by the Health Protection Agency that electro sensitivity is a physical impairement, this blood test will provide the final proof. It is vital that people who believe that they are affected have this blood test. Further details will appear on the Mast Sanity website shortly.

Sian

--------

From: Eileen O'Connor
Subject: Window of Opportunity could be lost -blood tests
Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2005, 8:58 AM

Please see plea from Ingrid below, also enclosed details of the lab, we need people to take the blood test ASAP, this window of opportunity could be lost if we don't get enough people to take the test. We would appreciate any help we can get from the media as we do not have the power or money to advertise. We need to alert as many people as possible.

If you are due to get a mast I would suggest it would be worth having the test before it goes up then a couple of months later, put the industry on notice and inform them that your community will hold them responsible if your blood suddenly starts showing signs of radiation after the introduction of a mast in your community.

Kind Regards Eileen


Message from Ingrid Dickenson

On the matter of the blood tests in the UK, I am very concerned that I might have done all this work for nothing. BioLab has taken on the blood tests for two months only as trial period. If there are not enough people taking it up during that time, I assume the whole thing will fall apart. LaboTech will pick up the first samples Tuesday/Wednesday next week. In order to make it viable for them, they need at least 10 samples, as the courier fees are 200 Euros. We don't have 10 samples yet. All the people who have taken the test (about 8 so far) where friends or patients of mine. The blood cannot be frozen for longer than three weeks. So to keep the blood test running, we need at least 10 people every three weeks, and as the media has not taken up this news, it does not look good. I'm very surprised and disappointed because there are so many people moaning but when it comes to action, only a few come forward. If we loose the test after two months there will be no possibility to get it back and we lost the only chance to prove that there are changes in the blood which cause health effects. I agree that we will not be able to use this as immediate proof. But after a while (only if people come forward to do this test!) we will have the statistics we need to make our case. The other reason for taking this test is of course that the exact supplements can be taken to repair and limit further damage.

Please put the message of the blood test on all your mailing lists and websites and tell your people that it is vital that they take the test up asap. In a couple of months it might no longer be available due to lack of uptake. I've put a lot of time and effort into getting us here and won't be able to do it again. Regards

Ingrid

Here is the registration form for the blood test:

http://www.omega-news.info/anforderungsschein_englisch.pdf

Please get in touch with

Mark Howard Biolab Medical Unit
9 Weymouth Street London W1W 6DB
Tel: (+44) 020-7636 5959/5905
Fax: (+44) 020-7580 3910
Internet: http://www.biolab.co.uk
E-mail: mark@biolab.co.uk

Regards Ingrid

PS Thanks for the info

Kent Courier

15:00 - 09 September 2005

Two mobile phone companies have lost their fight to install nine masts on the roof of a warehouse in Southborough.

Communication giants T-Mobile and O2 initially applied to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council for planning permission to erect the steel antennas, which act as mini mobile phone masts, in Draper Street in August last year.

But the authority refused the application because the proposal would have a pontentially detrimental effect to the character and appearance of the Southborough Conservation Area and would not be in keeping with the fabric of the existing building.

There were also concerns about the volume of radio frequency emissions.

In January, an appeal was launched against the refusal but now the Planning Inspectorate has thrown it out on the grounds that, while there is a need for better network coverage in the area, the scheme would "create somewhat bulky and alien features out of keeping with the form of the host building, which would be highly visible from both private residential property and public viewpoints".

The decision is a relief to residents, who have seen a flurry of masts erected in the area during the last few years.

After six similar antennas were given the go ahead on the same warehouse roof last year, residents living in the adjacent Castle Street were even considering moving house.

Elaine Cardon-Llach has been fighting a battle for almost two years to stop a 12ft mast being installed near her house between Harlands Way and Birchwood Avenue.

She said: "I'm shocked because they [mobile phone companies] usually win on appeal and the term 'conservation area' means nothing these days."

But the London Road resident did not think the ruling would be the start of a trend to stop other masts being erected.

Lincolnshire Echo 10.09.05

Be the first reader to comment on this story
http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=156393&command=displayContent&sourceNode=156123&contentPK=13164074#commentform

10:30 - 10 September 2005
Prices of homes near the site of a proposed mobile phone mast could plummet by up to £10,000, according to residents.

People living in Caistor Road in Birchwood, Lincoln, also fear their children's health would be affected by radiation from the mast.

Now they are starting a petition in a bid to stop the mast going up.

Mobile phone company Hutchison 3G has applied to Lincoln City Council to put up the 12 and a half metre structure.

The firm wants to put it on a grass verge in Birchwood Avenue, directly behind 13 Caistor Road.

Mum-of-one Cheryl Roberts (41) lives at the address and says she has contacted estate agents who told her the value of her property would drop.

"Agents have told us that we could lose as much as £10,000 on the sale of our house," she said.

"I and my husband Clive have plans to move abroad when our 14-year-old daughter has finished her education.

"This could really affect the price we get when we sell.

"No-one wants something like this near them. It's going to look horrendous and there are also the suspected health risks.

"If there is the slightest chance this is going to make my family ill then we obviously don't want it."

Her neighbour, 39-year-old Sam Wakefield, said estate agents had also told her the value of her property would fall.

"We just feel so powerless. We've been told by the council that we cannot object on the grounds of house prices, or health risks - these are the things that are really worrying us," she said.

The mum-of-three plans to launch a petition today.

"We're going to show this company how much objection there is. There's already two masts in Birchwood Avenue. People are sick of it," she said.

A spokesman for Walters in Silver Street, Lincoln, said that mobile phone masts can affect house prices.

"It's fair to say that a mobile phone mast yards from a property is going to have a negative effect on saleability," he said. "And it of course follows that if a house isn't selling then the asking price has to be dropped. Valuing is a subjective process, but these masts are unpopular with many people."

Lincoln City Council spokesman Zoe Staton said: "It is true that the effect on house prices and health concerns are not material planning considerations.

"We can only look at appearance and site when making a decision."

Across the country, concerns have been raised about the effects of radiation from phone masts. It is feared they might lead to cancer.

3G spokesman Brian Spooner said: "The proposed base station location has been chosen to fill in a requirement for coverage in the area and will blend with existing street lighting columns.

"I understand some people's concerns about the health issue based upon what they might have seen in the media, but it is important to look at the scientific evidence surrounding it."

Omega here you can look at the scientific evidence:
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wissenschaft+zu+Mobilfunk/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cancer+Cluster
http://www.buergerwelle.de/body_science.html

Mr Spooner refused to comment on house prices.

Shropshire Star 10.09 05

A towering mobile phone mast planned for a residential area of Shrewsbury could be scrapped amid a storm of objections from nearly 100 protesters.

Telecommunications giant Hutchinson 3G wants to build the 60ft mast on land off the B4380 Shelton Road in Copthorne - less than 40m from the nearest home.

But residents have launched a campaign to have the scheme thrown out. They claim that the mast is too high, has potential health implications and is too close to houses.

The 95 residents have also raised concerns about the close proximity of the site to former Ministry of Defence land which has outline planning permission for a new primary school.

Planning bosses at Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council are due to discuss the proposal at a meeting on Tuesday, and are likely to refuse the plans as the mast would be "visually prominent".

The residents have gained the backing of ward councillor George Richey and MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham Daniel Kawczynski. Councillor Richey will suggest two alternative sites for the mast which were further away from homes.

Nobody from Hutchinson 3G was available for comment today.

LUXEMBOURG -(Dow Jones)- The European Court of Justice ruled Thursday that most taxes imposed on mobile phone masts are legal.

The case involves the Belgian communes of Fleron and Schaerbeek, who imposed taxes on masts to the dismay of Belgian mobile phone companies Belgacom SA (BELG.BT) and Mobistar SA (MOBB.BT).

The court ruled the taxes follow a 1997 telecommunications directive - provided they do not privilege one operator above another. The Belgian court still must determine whether the taxes do not discriminate.

Wireless operators such as Telekom Austria AG (TKA) and Deutsche Telekom AG's (DT) Austrian unit are closely following the case. The province of Lower Austria is set to tax mobile phone masts from Jan. 1, 2006. A group called the Citizen's Initiative of Mobile Phone Customers, through its Web site www.mobilfunkkunden.at, have protested the tax.

Both E.U. Information Society and Media Commissioner Viviane Reding and Austrian Deputy Chancellor and Infrastructure Minister Hubert Gorbach have come out against the proposed tax in recent weeks.

And yet, the two Belgian communes imposed a tax of about EUR3,000 per mast. Mobile phone companies argued that the tax contradicts an E.U. law deregulating telecommunications infrastructure. The communes argued that the deregulation did not refer to financial measures, only to governments imposing technical restrictions.

-By Meghan Sapp, Dow Jones Newswires; 32-2-741 1480; meghan.sapp@dowjones.com

--------

Hello,

I read the article -EU Court Rules Most Mobile Phone "Mast Taxes" Are Legal.

Do you maybe know the number of the file (in court)- this is very impotrant decision to use in my country as well.


Thanks

Iris.

--------

Dear Iris,

Thank you for your message though I’m sorry for the delay in writing. I have been out of the office. The case number is C-544/03 and can be found on the http://www.curia.eu.int website.


Best,

Meghan Sapp


Informant: Iris Atzmon

Grimsby Telegraph

Be the first reader to comment on this story
http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=151905&command=displayContent&sourceNode=151583&contentPK=13160206#commentform

MARK NAYLOR AND KATIE NORMAN
MARK.NAYLOR@GRIMSBYTELELGRAPH.CO.UK

12:30 - 09 September 2005

Controversial plans for a mobile phone mast in Humberston will be fought "to the bitter end", councillors vowed today.

It's the first time in the history of North East Lincolnshire Council that anyone has tried to get a revocation order. The pledge came from planning committee members Coun John Colebrook and Coun Chris Shaw, who are demanding the council overturns permission for the mast, to be sited at the junction of North Sea Lane and Carrington Drive.

But Coun Colebrook is angry about Coun Shaw's claims that he was not shown a 505-name petition from protesters before a North East Lincolnshire Council planning committee meeting on August 26.

As reported in the Grimsby Telegraph, approval for the Vodafone 3G mast scraped through by six votes to five.

Coun Colebrook (Con, Humberston and New Waltham) has written to the council's chief executive, George Krawiec, calling for the council to make a revocation order, which would reverse the approval of the planning application. Coun Shaw plans to do the same.

But the order would almost certainly mean the council having to pay "a lot of money" in compensation costs to Vodafone, leaving Coun Colebrook with doubts his plea will succeed.

"But I have got to do it on behalf of those I represent," he said.

"It is the last option open to them. It's a very emotional issue.

"It's the first time in the history of North East Lincolnshire Council that anyone has tried to get a revocation order."

He hopes the matter will be discussed at the full council meeting on September 29.

Opponents of the scheme are expected to spell out their opposition during public question time before the meeting.

Coun Colebrook rebuked Coun Shaw (Lab, Sidney Sussex) for claiming he was not shown the protesters' views before the vote.

He says photocopies of the petition were clearly printed on page after page of the planning committee's agenda.

"He hasn't read his papers," said Coun Colebrook.

"He would have had it seven days before the meeting."

But Coun Shaw said he would not have supported the application for the mast if he had been able to read all the objections, which he maintains were not in the agenda.

He said: "To say I have not read the paperwork is an insult, I read what was there.

"What I am saying is that all the objections were not there and I am concerned I have made the wrong decision."

Up to 100 people attended a meeting in the Countryman public house, Humberston, on Wednesday, when those present discussed options available to stop the mast being put up.