FRESH doubts about the safety of mobile phone masts near schools have been triggered by a government inspector.
George Baird, from the Planning Inspectorate, said concern about health risks was one reason for rejecting an appeal by mobile giant Orange.
It wanted to put a 15-metre mast 100 metres from Clarendon Fields Community Primary School in Dukinfield, Tameside.
It is thought to be the first time health concerns have been cited by a government inspector blocking a phone mast.
In his report, Mr Baird wrote: "The reason for refusal refers to concern about the effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields from the proposed equipment, given that the site adjoins the Clarendon Fields Community Primary School, public open space and houses in Clarendon Street and Angel Close.
"I acknowledge that such fears are relevant to my decision."
Geoff Williams from Mast Sanity, which campaigns against phone masts in sensitive areas, said: "I believe that it is the first time that an inspector has used safety as a reason. The government advice remains confusing.
"In their guidelines they say in one paragraph health can be considered then, in the next, health doesn't need to be considered.
"I believe the inspector's words in this case will give a lot of hope to a lot of people."
Mr Baird's other reasons for refusal were the "harsh and hostile appearance" of the mast and its "conflict with development plan policy".
Decision
Members of the Speakers Panel, which considers planning applications for Tameside Council, read Mr Baird's report and voted unanimously to reject an application to erect a scaled-down version of the mast in the grounds of Dukinfield Cricket Club, adjoining the school.
The panel voted to uphold the inspector's decision on the "perceived health risks".
Local councillors, residents and school head Martin Kelly objected to the application.
A report by British scientists from the Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation said exposure levels from mobile base stations were extremely low and "unlikely" to pose a health risk.
But Tameside councillor John Taylor said: "When an expert finally says `yes they are definitely safe', then I will believe they are.
"I might not know all the technical data, but the inspector's explanation for refusal is very clear."
A spokesman for Orange said: "Planning guidance means the decision maker is entitled to weigh public concerns as part of the process.
"There is no evidence linking mobile technology with ill health."
In November last year, the Appeal Court threw out a test case over a decision to allow the siting of a mobile phone mast near three schools.
The decision came months after three giant mobile firms won a High Court battle for the right to put up a 25-metre mast in Harrogate, North Yorkshire, despite health concerns and opposition from deputy prime minister John Prescott.
Should phone masts be sited near schools? Have your say.
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 20 and replies | View All
John Elliott, Bristol (10/02/2005 at 09:06)
As children's skulls are a lot thinner than adults they absorb up to 50% more of the radiation than adults. That is why there are more cases of childhood leukemia near these masts. That is why in the USA and other European countries, mobile phone masts are not placed within 500 metres of housing.
Their is a massive cover up by both the mobile phone companies and government over this issue because of the huge sums of money being made at the expense of people's health. It is ridiculous to only ban these masts near schools. They must also be banned from the vicinity of housing, where children spend the majority of their time.
Caroline Davey, Winchester (10/02/2005 at 12:48)
Sandi Lawrence, Aldwick, Bognor Regis (10/02/2005 at 13:09)
Sanity at last!
There are scientific studies from the 70's saying microwave radiation is not safe and now that we have 3G and Airwave Tetra it is really getting dangerous.
This present government should forget the financial implications and possibly the back handers from phone companies, and admit they have made a terrible mistake.
If they do not, the end results could be worse that the recent tsunami and even the holocaust, especially with TETRA
It is time for people across the UK to call for an end to this madness, in a calm but firm way.
There is ample good research abroad indicating that there are health problems, and here in this country several scientists have warned about TETRA but they have been discredited!
I would rather see people alive and well than think of instigating compensation claims, so the government, phone companies and landlords who allow masts on their land had better rethink their positions quickly before more harm is done.
Time is running out!
IT WILL BE PROVED that this technology causes harm to humans and animals!
Let's just make sure there is not too big a price to pay and too much shame to live with.
To add your voice to the call
www.mastsanity.org
08704 322 377
daz, manchester (10/02/2005 at 15:51)
Felicity Tanous, Brighton, East Sussex (10/02/2005 at 18:04)
It is appalling that mobile phone operators ignore mounting evidence of people`s ill-health and concerns around masts; also that the operators (who claim they have corporate responsibility and accountability) continue to target the young with new-fangled designs of mobile phones.
The planning laws must be made rigorous relating to applications to install masts wherever they could affect human health.
JOHN.A.Curd., SOUTHPORT LANCS. (10/02/2005 at 19:24)
Masts our Chairman is Geoff
Williams of Mast Sanity.
Health should be the major cosideration on past and future
Planning not just visible ameneties and this should be in the Political party Manifesto`s.
We need something to rid us of
3G masts like our Tech.Toy. from the other side of Hell.
Maybe the only solution to get people in action is for the
Scriptwriters of Coronation Street, and Eastenders to put some of the Character castings
in the family role of illness because of the Mobile Phone masts in the storylines ?
Like the Websters and the Beals respectively.
Please go on fighting the Mast
in your areas and complain to
your Doctor of Poor Health symtoms percieved as a cosequence of the Mast.
John.A.Curd.Retired Nurse &
Counsellor. Southport.
Annie, Chorlton (10/02/2005 at 23:18)
If I were them, I'd be more concerned about the thousands of mobile phones used MANY times a day by children.
The radio waves emitted by a mobile phone are much more powerful than anything a mast emits, unless of course you are standing near the transmitter, on a platform at the same height as the mast.
Frankly i'd rather see masts sited away from schools and the like just to shut these people up, but I see no reason to prevent them on any other buildings/garage forecourts, farmland etc.
Ruth Evans, Hertfordshire (10/02/2005 at 23:27)
No! Nor should they be sited near residences or where people work. There is growing evidence that these masts are causing people to suffer from illnesses such as headaches, sleep problems. low blood count and cancer. Until independent research is done a precautionary approach should be adopted and masts should be sited far away from people.
Noel Backlees, London (11/02/2005 at 08:30)
The average phone mast is as powerful as a 40watt light bulb they will no doubt be banning these next.
I agree that mobile 'phones should not be given to children as they are actually more powerful than the masts (in terms of concentrated power) but there is NO repeat NO real evidence that public mobile phone masts are dangerous.
There is NO research, at least research that has been properly conducted**, that establishes a risk.
**Putting a number of people in a room and telling them that there is a mobile mast next door and asking if they feel any effect is NOT research. The same result could be gained from telling someone that there is a ticking bomb under the desk, do you feel safe?!
Eileen O'Connor, Formby (11/02/2005 at 09:21)
I have suffered cancer at the age of 38 and now live in a cancer cluster after living 100m from a 22.5m mast for over 7 years.
We must not put profit before our childrens health.
Kind Regards
Eileen O'Connor
www.s-c-r-a-m.co.uk
www.radiationresearch.org
Mrs Christine Colgrave, Eastleigh, Hampshire (11/02/2005 at 12:47)
Carol Gray, Woking (11/02/2005 at 13:36)
susan fergusson, Hezel Grove, stockport (11/02/2005 at 18:57)
Mrs. G. Lyden, Kensworth, Dunstable, Beds.LU6 2PH (11/02/2005 at 21:48)
Sincerely, Gill Lyden
CL, Manchester (12/02/2005 at 12:17)
liz, Cambridge (02/03/2005 at 16:33)
Every mast will have its range and spread of micro-radiation energy, and its worse to be in the spread. The angle of the transmitters on the pole determone the direction of the transmitted micro radiation. If your property is in the mid area, beware,. but what incentive is there for the government to clamp down of this menace, when it is filling the treasury with no less than 22 billion pounds a year in licence fees alone from the mobile phone companies?
Mrs. G. Lyden, Kensworth nr. Dunstable (06/03/2005 at 12:16)
There is proof that ElectroMag- netic Radio Frequency emiss- ions do damage health, but our government and health protection agencies ignore it,
'though I am sure they know it!
Pauk, Rochester (07/03/2005 at 16:00)
BAN "mobile TELEphones"
BAN "mobile TELEphone masts"
OR
Ban brain cells
Ban peace of mind
Ban SANITY
END OF
John, Boston, Lincolnshire (14/04/2005 at 18:03)
LYNN DYSON, MELTHAM, HUDDERSFIELD. (18/09/2005 at 21:08)