World-News

http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/mobile_coverage_for_london_underground.htm

Just asked my local councillors (London Borough of Haringey) and local MP (LibDem Lynne Featherstone) for advice and support on this issue. All Londoners on this list must get together to organise a London wide campaign. We need to try and get the London Press behind us asap. (Locals, and most importantly, The Evening Standard). The Transport Unions might be worth a go as well.

First ideas for a list of arguments:

Installing a mobile network in the tube would be a massive blow against the human rights of electrohypersensitive passengers (circa 3% of the population) who would no longer be able to use the tube.

It also poses a security poblem with regards to terrorrists being able to remotely detonate bombs.

It also poses a health and safety risk to all employees, especially drivers, who would be continuously exposed to a strong high frequency electromagnetic field, which is not only likely to reduce their concentration on the job and make them more accident prone, but will also cause all the known long term effects such as cardio-vascular illnesses, neurological illnesses such as Parkinson's and Alzheimers and of course, cancer.

Andrea

--------

I know before I realised the risks posed by mobile phone antennae...there were loads of complaints about how unsociable it was to be around people talking on their mobiles...comedians complained quite hilariously taking the mickey out of people pretendiong to be important, hanging on their mobiles...it was considered a real dweeby thing to do to be forever on a mobile having a private conversation in a really public place...

Perhaps a plea could be placed that for the half hour most people spend on the tube, they could have some relief from their mobiles...and those of everyone else!

I think a much wider audience would be sympathetic to the proposal that the underground is simply not the place to be forced to listen to peoples' private mobile conversations....(worse than second hand smoke!)...than would be sympathetic to the health risks posed by antennae and the phones.

Ruth

--------

I wonder if a certain level of emissions would breach ICNIRP - I know this has been suggested as a possibility at pop concerts, etc. (and I know ICNIRP is inadequate) but some phones have higher SAR rates than others, so in a worst-case scenario, could a frenzy of calls create an unlawful environment?

Sylvia

--------

Yes, Sylvia, German studies in buses have shown that even ICNIRP guidelines will be breached by the hotspots created in the carriages' faraday cage.

Andrea

--------

Calling for a phone signal? Do you love or loathe mobile phones?
http://freepage.twoday.net/stories/1884726/

13 April 2006

EDITORIAL - herts.advertiser@archant.co.uk

A BARRISTER is needed to help sort out a tangle over a phone mast proposed for Clarence Park, St Albans.

The district council's cabinet has backed a decision taken 18 months ago to allow mobile phone operator Orange to put the mast on a new floodlighting tower for St Albans City Football Club in Clarence Park.

In October 2004 the cabinet, acting as trustees for Clarence Park, agreed that Orange should be given a licence for the scheme.

But their own officers then decided not to go ahead with the plan following legal advice and their decision was confirmed by sports and leisure portfolio holder, Cllr Sheila Burton, and resources portfolio holder Cllr Chris Oxley.

Last week the cabinet took a fresh look at the plan following pressure from residents of the Marshalswick area.

They were concerned at reports that Orange would need 10 separate masts close to their homes if they did not get the one in Clarence Park.

The council's head of legal services, Mike Lovelady, warned cabinet members they had to view the application as trustees for the park and could not consider the fact that Orange might need to put up additional masts in other areas if it did not get the go-ahead for its scheme.

Valuer and estates surveyor Andrew Wearmouth said the latest advice from the Charity Commission was that the council could only give permission for the scheme if it benefited the park.

He added: "In all honesty that is something I could not justify."

Council leader Robert Donald felt that the council should call in a barrister to advise on the conflicting views which were being given about the legal position.

Comment to 'Are some people sensitive to mobile phone signals?'
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/332/7546/0-d#132556

The article 'Are some people sensitive to mobile phone signals?' by Rubin c.s. was published recently in British Medical Journal (15 April 2006 in BMJ 2006;332:886-891, doi:10.1136/bmj.38765.519850.55) (to be found here: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/332/7546/886

Frans van Velden MSc

Rubin et al. define electromagnetic sensitivity as a condition in which symptoms are reported AFTER perceived exposure. This is not the definition of electromagnetic (hyper)sensitivity (EHS). EHS is a condition in which symptoms are reported as related to and attributed to exposure to electromagnetic fields (WHO factsheet 296, to be found here: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs299/en/index.html ). The afflicted persons perceive symptoms and not exposure. The latter is impossible, since EHS and non-EHS individuals cannot detect exposure.

It has been suggested that symptoms might arise from environmental factors unrelated to electromagnetic fields. There are some indications that symptoms may be due to worries about health effects of electromagnetic fields, rather than the exposure itself. Some studies suggest that reactivity in the central nervous system and imbalance in the autonomic nervous system in EHS afflicted tend to be outside the normal range (WHO factsheet 296). The suggestion of Rubin, that perceived exposure is the cause of symptoms, is contradictionary to 'Whatever its cause ...' (WHO factsheet 296).

Usually EHS is assumed on the basis of single-blind experiences, exposure is confirmed afterwards by environmental data or measurements. According to WHO factsheet 296 no scientific basis currently (i.e. December 2005) exists for a connection between EHS and electromagnetic fields. This is under discussion. High frequency electromagnetic fields have proven effects on biological systems. They intensify the neuronal activity, influence the cerebral bloodflow and brain activity, damage DNA and indications that they cause headaches are concrete (Report for T-Mobile, Jülich Institute, 9 May 2005, to be found here: http://www.emf-risiko.de/projekte/ergeb_bewlit.html ).

Rubin et al. write 'Participants were exposed to .. a sham exposure with no signal present' (Abstract, Intervention). This is contradictionary to their clarification 'For the sham exposure, a continuous wave signal was generated .. only a minimal leakage of this signal occurred (SAR 0,002 W/kg)' (Methods, Exposures). It means Rubin et al. answered the research question beforehand. They assumed people are not sensitive to a signal when the SAR is less than 0,002 W/kg. David Bücher from Darmstadt already made clear that 2 mW/kg is even above the SAR during the exposure phase of the study by Zwamborn et al. in 2003 (rapid response to be found here: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/332/7546/886#129848 ).

Figure 2 of Rubin et al. (to be found here: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/332/7546/886/FIG2 , the time scale is not constant) shows results of the provocation. It does not give all the information about the different densities and structures of the electromagnetic fields, but the growth and decline of the headache severities are consistent. After 50 minutes the results are the same for self-declared sensitive people and self-declared non-sensitive people. The severities however are different. Without any knowledge of the densities and structures of the electromagnetic fields this is exactly what would be expected with an open mind.

Rubin et al. confirm that the symptoms were not trivial. They are puzzled by the results. Did some inadequacy exist in the methods? The sensitivity of the visual analogue scales and the statistical techniques did not have any short-comings. However, they overlook one simple, uncomplicated explanation: the SAR is not an indicator of how worse the scenario. A 'sham' signal with 0,002 W/kg triggered about the same headache severity as a GSM-signal with 1,4 W/kg. This corresponds with people reporting being sensitive to mobile phones at distances of one metre or more. Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, former head of the WHO, reported headaches by stand-by mobile phones closer than four metres, abating until half an hour after the phones were turned off (Aud Dalsegg, Dagbladet Norge, 9 March 2002).

Instead Rubin et al. choose a vague and complicated explanation, the nocebo ('I will harm') effect. Again, they answer the research question beforehand, by the assumption that all exposures do not cause symptoms. However, the nocebo effect can not fully explain the results. The headaches of the self-declared non-sensitive people can not be attributed to a nocebo effect, since these people do not believe a mobile phone can do harm. The growth and decline of the headache severities of the non-sensitive people are not random, they show the same pattern as of the sensitive people, the only difference is less severity.

A nocebo effect would imply a difference between the two groups. Rubin et al. did not find any difference from the questionnaires or demographic data. There is no indication of different behaviour, lifestyle, personality. No indication of a different attitude to modern electromagnetic equipment. Many self-declared sensitive people have a positive attitude to mobile communication and were early adaptors. According to Rubin et al. it is interesting that symptom severity increased during exposition. A nocebo effect indeed would produce a different picture. Nocebo effects are usually vague. Figure 2 is not vague at all.

In medicine, a nocebo effect means people re-label existing ailments as side effects of their medication (Arthur Barsky). This means people who have headaches, whatever the cause, start to attribute them to mobile phone use. So, the self-declared sensitive people should report headaches before and in between of mobile phone use too. The headaches should stay away when using a mobile phone and being told there is no field (placebo effect). Nocebo is a learning process. The attribution of a headache to a mobile phone call is rather unlikely, since it is a positive experience to be able to communicate with other people freely.

Instead of accepting the simple and straightforward explanation (electromagnetic fields cause headaches) Rubin et al. walk into the swamp of nocebo and placebo effects. Why? Rubin: "Right. There was no difference in symptom severity between our sham condition and the active conditions which were approximately 700 times stronger. I think that's quite good evidence that it wasn't the RF (radio frequency) that was causing the symptoms." Simplified, Rubin says a train driving 4.5 km/hour can not hurt anybody, because it has 700 times less energy than a train driving 110 km/hour. The effect of the first train is nocebo, so the effect of the second train is also nocebo. If people who do not think a train can hurt are hit, they also suffer from nocebo effects.

The interaction of electromagnetic fields and biological systems is not like that. There is an abundance of sources, producing together the environmental factor electromagnetic fields, with local density and structure (frequencies, modulations) variable in time. There are many people with different sensitivities to different effects, therefore suffering from different consequences. Rubin et al. have been found coherent results by provocation. They found evidence that the concrete indications that electromagnetic fields cause headaches are true. People who ignore this, are suffering from a nolebo ('I don't want to') effect.

Correspondence to fransp@dds.nl



Hi Frans

Thank you for the detailed reply that you wrote about 'Rubin et al, mobile phone signals'. I knew that the results were not correct but I was not sure why. Your letter helped me to understand the reasons much better.

I was thinking from a slightly different angle. The test were undertaken in a central London hospital. We already know that London is a very highly polluted environment with cell phones, cell phone towers and all kinds of other wireless devices. We also know that the electrical equipment used in hospitals, causes extreme problems with dirty electricity in which the electrical wiring causes radiation exposure. Also, wiring throughout the hospital produces its own electromagnetic and electrical fields.

Unless the tests took place in an area that was completely clear of any other EMF exposure and RF exposure, the results would be useless. The research document mentions a 'dedicated suite of offices' at Kings College London. This does not sound like an environment completely clear of EMF and RF pollution, and it does not mention any special scientific facilities.

It seems that the researchers have failed in their research and that testing needs to be undertaken in a completely clean environment and a part of the test needs to occur with absolutely no signal or background interference.

Best regards

Martin Weatherall
Ontario, Canada.

--------

Electromagnetic fields and public health
http://freepage.twoday.net/stories/1804962/

http://www.ourworldisnotforsale.org/about.asp?about=signon&lang=english

***PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY***

"Stop Corporate Globalization! - Another World is Possible"

This statement was crafted by the Our World Is Not For Sale (OWINFS) network - a worldwide network of organizations, activists and social movements fighting the trade and investment liberalizing aspects of the current model of corporate globalization. OWINFS is committed to a new, socially just and sustainable trading system.

This new statement is an updated version of the previous "WTO: Shrink or Sink" statement. It has already been signed by 160 Organisations and includes an overall critique of the current globalization model, showing the impacts of this model on workers, peasants, family farmers, fishers,migrants, women, indigenous peoples, the environment and natural resources etc. And also posing the vision of a global economy built on the principles of economic justice, genuine ecological sustainability, and democratic accountability, one which assert the interests of people over corporations.

Excerpt from the Statement: "...The choice before us is stark: either we accept the current corporate-centered global order and forfeit the welfare of succeeding generations and the future of the planet itself, or we take up the difficult challenge of moving toward a new system that puts at its heart the interests of people, communities, and the environment."

I encourage you to review the whole of this statement, and hope you will consider signing it. You can view the current list of signatories at http://www.ourworldisnotforsale.org and can read the statement in English, Spanish, French and Italian.

HOW to sign on - It will take just 30 seconds of your time:

1. click "view Signatories".

2. click "sign-on" and give the name of your organisation, base, contact person and e mail address, DONE!

For further information please contact Margrete Strand Rangnes Margrete.Strand@SIERRACLUB.ORG


Sincerely

Carol Bergin
for the OWINFS New Statement working group


Informant: sarah p

From: Eileen O'Connor eileen@smokestackltd.co.uk
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 23:18:16 +0100
Subject: People are massacred in the Congo for the sake of coltan needed for mobile phones

Head of Justice and Peace from the Congo due to speak at a CAFOD conference in London.

Take a look at the enclosed CAFOD conference details, it might be worth thinking about attending this conference organised by CADFOD. One of the main speakers is the Head of Justice and Peace from the Congo. Remember people in the Congo are being massacred not only for gold but also for coltan, columbite-tantalite http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/tantalite which is a black tar-like mineral http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/mineral needed especially for mobile phones. Much of the world's supply of coltan comes from Democratic http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Democratic+Republic+of+the+Congo Republic of the Congo.

A recent UN Security Council report charged that a great deal of it is illegally mined and smuggled http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Smuggling out of Congo by armies from Uganda http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Uganda , Rwanda http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Rwanda , and Burundi http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Burundi , occupying the eastern region of Congo. One estimate has the Rwandan army making $250 million in 18 months from the sale of coltan.

For more information go to: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Coltan
..

http://www.cafod.org.uk/get_involved/campaigning/unearth_justice/conferences

Unearth Justice Conferences

Be in at the start of something big.

CAFOD is launching the Unearth Justice campaign at two conferences, where you can:

* Hear from CAFOD partners about how gold mining affects people and the environment in their countries.

* Quiz the experts at a Question Time session.

* Enjoy live music and drama

* Ground your campaigning in your faith with special liturgy.

* Take action to stop mining companies undermining the poor

The Conferences take place in:

* London on Saturday 13 May 2006
(Emmanuel Centre, 9-23 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3DW) or

* Bury on Saturday 20 May 2006
(Holy Cross Sixth Form College, Manchester Rd, Bury BL9 9BB)

Inspiring Speakers

Speakers will include Abbé Alfred Buju, Head of the Justice and Peace Commission at Caritas Bunia in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Pedro Landa, a director of Caritas Tegucigalpa in Honduras, and CAFOD Director Chris Bain.

Essentials

* Both days run from 11am - 3:45pm.

* Lunch will be available to buy, including vegetarian options.

* The conferences are suitable for those over 14. There will be special workshops for young people and students.

* There will be a crèche available for under 5s (booking essential).

To reserve yours, fill in the form at the foot of this page. (Online registrations are limited to a maximum of 20 people per party. If you require more places than this please call us on 020 7326 5692.)

Places are limited, so please only register if you are sure you can come. Places will be allocated on a 'first come first served' basis. We will confirm your registration by email, so please include a valid email address.

http://www.cafod.org.uk/get_involved/campaigning/unearth_justice/conferences#form#form Go to form

Campaigners in Wales

CAFOD Wales will be launching the 'Unearth Justice' campaign at the annual Pantasaph Family Day in north Wales on 13 May. If you live in Wales, please do join them! Call 01978 355 084 or email northwales@cafod.org.uk for more details.

--------

From Karen Barratt

Re: Independent 'Red Phone' article - I sent the following

Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 1:16 PM Subject: RED PHONE ALERT

Dear Martin

I saw your report on the Bono 'Red Phone' initiative and thought you might be interested in the following. I think everyone has to be suspicious when the telecom operators start offering to help with such moral crusades. They certainly are desperate to recoup some of the £23 billion licence money and getting everyone to ditch their current mobiles might give the struggling 3G market a shot in the arm.

Karen Barratt

The following is an extract from a longer article called "Hard Cell" in EC.

http://www.ethicalconsumer.org


"One of the most pressing mobile phone issues is that of coltan, much of which is mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).. 80% of the world's supply of coltan is said to be found in the east of the country. It is a crucial ingredient used in mobile phones for its heat conducting properties. It is said to be incredibly difficult to ascertain whether or not coltan from the DRC has been mined illegally, since that part of the country is under the control of rebel troops. In recent years, approximately three million Congolese have died as a result of the war. Farmers are said to have been forced from their land to mine, while others have reportedly been forced into prostitution, fighting and child labour. Some studies of the crisis estimate that in north eastern Congo, 30% of children have abandoned school to mine for coltan. Gangs from neighbouring countries such as Rwanda, Uganda and Ximbabwe are also said to be heavily involved in the smuggling trade, and use the proceeds from sales of the mineral to fund weapon procurement and oppression. Some rarer species of gorillas and other animals are nearing extinction as their forests are destroyed to make mining easier or they are killed for meast to feed rebel soldiers and miners."

--------

On top of promoting the new red mobile, there was also a piece written by a Vodaphone consultant on how mobiles have made life in Africa so much better. I suppose people die of AIDS before they die of cancer, but this may change as they get more saturated with mobiles and masts.

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/analysis_and_features/article485092.ece

Andrea



From Mast Sanity/Mast Network

--------

Congo's tragedy: the war the world forgot

By Johann Hari

This is the story of the deadliest war since Adolf Hitler’s armies marched across Europe. It is a war that has not ended. But is also the story of a trail of blood that leads directly to you: to your remote control, to your mobile phone, to your laptop and to your diamond necklace.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13094.htm

--------

“The War The World Ignores”

The conflict in Congo has been called the world's largest forgotten war. Yet while millions have died since the start of the most recent violence in 1998, the country has been torn apart by resource exploitation and government repression for decades.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/07/1436229


From Information Clearing House

--------

BLOOD PHONES
http://www.willthomasonline.net/willthomasonline/Blood_Phones.html


Informant: Paul Doyon

--------

http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=coltan

NEIL PRESTON ASSISTANT NEWS EDITOR NEIL.PRESTON@GRIMSBYTELEGRAPH.CO.UK

12:30 - 11 April 2006 "WE shall not be moved."

The contractors had unloaded their digger but had to stop and ring their bosses when they realised we were not going anywhere. That was the defiant cry from residents who today began a third morning of protests over the construction of a mobile phone mast.

Yesterday neighbours came out in force to prevent contractors erecting an 8m high mast on a grass verge at the junction of Carrington Drive and North Sea Lane, Humberston.

And they were planning to do the same today.

North East Lincolnshire Council gave the go-ahead for the Vodafone antennae last September and ever since, residents have been trying to fight the decision.

They brought out tables and chairs and held a sit-down protest on the grass verge where the mast is to be built.

Passing motorists pipped their horns in support.

Yesterday contract workers arrived to begin work but left after an hour when residents defiantly sat down on the grass and refused to budge.

Terry Barrs (67), of North Sea Lane, said: "The contractors came just after 10am to start their work.

"We noticed that they'd arrived, so all gathered together and sat on the grass.

"The contractors had unloaded their digger but had to stop and ring their bosses when they realised we were not going anywhere.

"Their bosses must have told them to pack up and go because they went and didn't come back all day.

"We are back out today as we believe the mast poses a health risk. We are going to fight it all the way."

Claire Kershaw, also of North Sea Lane, said: "I have two young children and my concerns are what damage it will do to them. For me it is not the sight of the mast that worries me, it is the health risk."

A petition was signed by more than 100 people and posted to Mono, the consultants for Vodafone, last year.

Peter Keeble (47), of North Sea Lane, added: "We will not give up on this."

Phil Wallis, development control manager for NELC, said: "Vodafone has had planning permission accepted by the Planning Committee so is entitled to erect the mast."

Bath Chronicle 10 April 2006

If you use your mobile that doesn't mean you can't campaign for the safe siting of masts.

If you care about your health and quality of life and/or if you have children, this is why you should be concerned about the proposed siting of three 3G masts by O2 in Kingsmead.

Mast Sanity ( http://www.mastsanity.org ), which campaigns for safer siting of masts, says this about 3G: "3G is the new internet and video phones launched in this country in March. There has been no specific research on either the new phones or the new masts. The only research that has been done is alarming. In 2003, Dutch government research showed that 3G base stations (masts) could cause a number of negative symptoms in people close by them.

"Symptoms included nauseousness, headaches and dizziness. What makes this report even more worrying is the fact that the study exposed people to radiation 30 times less powerful that some 3G masts, plus the study limited exposure to several minutes, not 24 hours of every single day."

Mast sanity is not worrying for nothing. Nationally, there are several problem areas known around 3G masts. Contrary to popular belief, the radiation from masts travels quite a distance and the worst sufferers within clusters of ill-health (including cancer) are generally found 100-300 metres away from installations.

Regardless of what you maybe told, masts such as these are being refused across the country.

However B &NES can only refuse if lots of local people object personally.

Inevitably, the siting of masts in highly residential areas is decided by a very small group of people - the planning services department.

The situation with local government only makes matters worse. For example, although the Bear Flat mast protesters won their case with B &NES - not to have a mast - this decision was appealed against by O2, and consequently Wendy Burden, planning inspector for the south west based in Bristol at John Prescott's office, agreed with O2 that it could indeed site the mast despite B &NES support of the Bear Flat group.

The Bear Flat group is still in the process of fighting on.

Don Foster has been actively campaigning for a 19-point change in planning laws to better regulate the 'wild west' mobile operators. So far, the Blair Government has rejected this. There are some very pro-active individuals and individual groups fighting masts in their areas, but what Bath and the people of Bath would benefit from is a group - a forum of long-term campaigners and concerned supporters - to meet several times a year. This would allow individuals to come to put strategies and therefore be more efficient and effective in opposing.

More and more 3G masts are being placed in residential areas - it is only a matter of time before your area receives a letter from O2/Vodafone etc wanting to put up a mast.

The evidence for long-term health risks is becoming too great to ignore.

If you are concerned and live or work around Kingsmead/Green Park/New King Street, in the first instance object strongly and vocally to B &NES planning services department about this mast.

Secondly, please get in touch with me, as I am wanting residents to attend a public meeting.

If you are already campaigning in your area and can offer practical advice and/or are interested in a long-term strategy group, please get in touch about making this happen!

Lastly, if you read this and are concerned about a mast near you - get organised (you also face property devaluation, for which O2 will not compensate! People move to get away from masts, not to them.)

You could be the difference between a mast going up or not - every single voice really does count. Mobile operators play on people saying nothing.

LARA VARGA
http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk

Wimbledon News 7.04.06

The future looks bright for a group of campaigners from Wimbledon Park, after controversial plans to install six Orange phone masts were thrown out.

The proposal to install the masts on Beaumont House in Arthur Road attracted a storm of objection, and a petition in protest drew more than 1,000 signatures and support from local politicians.

Wimbledon MP Stephen Hammond said: "Residents do not want this mast it will be an eyesore and is too close to a highly residential area."

Campaigners objected on grounds of health, depreciation of property value and the negative impact on the local park.

They said Wimbledon Park already had 34 masts and raised concern that the masts would be dangerously close to a nursery, in a district whose high birth rate has earned it the nickname Nappy Valley.

Wendy Pemberton, a key player in the campaign, said she objected to a "legal loophole" that allowed mobile phone operators not to require planning permission for masts if they are under 15 metres in height.

Although the proposals for masts on Beaumont House have now been dropped, Orange has claimed this is not in response to the anti-mast campaign, but because site providers Golfrate Holdings have changed their development plans.

An Orange spokesman said: "The fact is masts are not an optional extra. If you own a mobile phone you must accept there is an infrastructure needed to support your use of mobile phone services. TV and radio transmitters are much more powerful by comparison and we have lived with thesefor over 50 years with no problems.

"The cost of rolling out the network is very high and, quite frankly, if the operators could actually deliver the level of service and coverage customers demand on the existing infrastructure they would."

She added Orange will now go back to the drawing board to identify new potential sites for the masts.

Miss Pemberton said: "Residents are extremely pleased that Golfrate Holdings have retracted their agreement with Orange to use Beaumont House, but the list of alternative sites has not been disclosed. It is crucial residents stay focused and monitor this situation. Pressure must be applied to the council to take a more proactive stance in blocking permitted development rights' which repeatedly allow masts to be sited in residential areas."

Councillor Tariq Ahmad, who campaigned against a previous proposal to install masts on the same site three years ago, said: "People often say you can't oppose mobile phone masts, but our concerted efforts show it can work."

dpilkington@london.newsquest.co.uk

'Flagpole' mast appeal dismissed

Beverley Guardian 4.04.06

PLANS to install a phone mast on a prominent building in the centre of Beverley have been thrown out by a Government inspector. The inspector has backed East Riding Council's decision to refuse consent for a 'flagpole' antenna and equipment cabins to be installed at no 68 Saturday Market.

Hutchison 3G Ltd had appealed against the council's decision, but the appeal has been dismissed by Mr J M Turner, an inspector for the Planning Inspectorate, who ruled that the proposal would harm 'very considerably' the character of Beverley's Conservation Area.

Although he accepted that the proposed mast would meet guidelines on radiation exposure, Mr Turner did not accept that by disguising it as a replica flagpole it would be a sympathetic addition to the streetscene.

He said the building was a handsome and prominent structure, at a key location where two roads meet in North Bar Within. "The appellants urge on me the proposition that the imitation flagpole intended would be a sympathetic addition to the scene but I do not agree," he said.

"I accept the council's observations that the disguised mast would not look very much like a flagpole anyway but in any event it would not be at home atop a commercial building as a feature, if genuine, more commonly to be associated with a civic or public use."

04 April 2006