Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Wednesday 18th July 2007, 11:45AM BST.
Phone giants T-Mobile have exploited a Dudley Council clanger to stick up a 36-foot phone mast against the wishes of hundreds of angry residents.
Red-faced council planning officials are now taking “legal advice” after residents complained the mast had gone up on a pavement opposite the old Duncan Edwards pub in Priory Road.
They thought people power had won the day back in May when, after collecting hundreds of signatures, members of the council’s planning committee threw out the application.
But T-Mobile bosses say they have the law on their side to put the mast up – because the council failed to deal with the application within a 56-day deadline under planning law.
If local authorities fail to comply with the deadline, companies can deem consent to have been given.
Ward councillor Alan Finch said: “It is not very good publicity for the council – in fact it is disgusting. You have got residents here on the Priory estate who have had enough of a kicking as it is.
“As councillors we have got to answer to these residents who have gone about things the right way, put the petitions in and played their part only for professional people on big salaries to mess it up.
“If the council have messed up heads should roll – there should be an immediate investigation into what has gone wrong.
“The planners have sat on this and they know as well as we do about the 56-day rule, because they keep telling us about it.”
T-Mobile spokesman John O’Shaughnessy said the firm had been seeking to restore coverage to the area.
He said the old mast on the Duncan Edwards pub went when the site was demolished.
Mr O’Shaughnessy said T-Mobile submitted the application on February 16 and the timescale ran out in the middle of April. “We have not done anything wrong and we are confident the law is on our side,” he said.
Dudley Council spokesperson Katherine Finney said after taking legal advice the authority had been told it was not in a position to stop the applicant from installing the mast.
See Also:
Play Fantasy Football
Win a manager of the month award, courtesy of prize sponsor Banks's, by signing up today.
Latest dining reviews
Read the latest reviews by the Express & Star's dining out reviewers before you decide where to eat.
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
Yes it’s the same old story. This is happening far too often throughout the UK. Hardly surprising though. Planning chiefs are targeted by the multi billion pound phone operator publicity machine with their handouts, freebies, free lunches and corporate hospitality etc. They have a very cosy relationship with the planning officers and consequently mast applications are waved through with out too much bother to the detriment of the people who pay their wages, the council tax payers. Time after time planners fail to notify local residents of phone mast planning applications or mysteriously fail to adhere to the 56 day rule. Council tax payers receive an appalling service from planners throughout the country on this issue, especially as public health is being deliberately compromised.
Over 1000 independent studies, linking phone masts electro magnetic radiation with serious ill health including cancer, confirm that masts should not be sited within 350 metres of schools or housing. Phone operators dismiss such research, alleging that their own studies suggests no health risk. However last month the national press revealed that T-Mobile covered up the damaging results of their own research. The Ecolog Institute, a research organisation which examines the health effects of mobile phones, was commissioned by T-Mobile to investigate the possible health risks of mobile phone masts. The 2003 Ecolog report confirmed:
‘Given the results of the present epidemiological studies, it can be concluded that electromagnetic fields with frequencies in the mobile telecommunications range do play a role in the development of cancer. This is particularly notable for tumours of the central nervous system.’
The idea that unelected bodies (the mobile phone companies) have a right to expose people to the very real harm caused by phone mast electro magnetic radiation, amounts to enrolling the population in a giant biological experiment without their consent. Considering that children, the most vulnerable of all, are included in this experiment, it is shameful that their interests are disregarded so cynically in the pursuit of profit.
Report abuse
ref: proposed phone mast in st.francis church, friar park, wednesbury.
People are suggesting that phone mast companies and there partners are treating the British public the same as hitler did!!
No respect for them, ignoring people’s views, forcing things down their throat against their will, and it seems taking great pleasure in getting one over the British public.
People also suggest soon the British public will, as they did with Hitler, rise up and take direct action to defend themselves against a gross intrusion into there lives and well being.
People will, with respect, say these phone base stations have to go somewhere, fine, but they should never, as with anything else, be placed in a community where quite simply they are not welcome
If you don’t listen to the view of the public and keep riding roughshod over them we may end up having another civil war.
• The local church on friar park wednesbury wants to act against all that is Christian, by…
• ignoring the communities views,
• putting local peoples health at risk, young and old
• facilitating the downloading of porn and gambling,
• taking money at other peoples expense
• Not only does the church want to force this mast on them, they also try to discredit the people of Friar Park by stating continuous lies about them. i.e. a “bay mob” is amongst the remarks made.
The church would have the people believe these masts are safe, although they will not personally grantee it, and even refused to let their environmental officer Paul Cawthrone from attending a local public meeting!
Then they produce a dr mike clark from the health protection agency, what a joke!.
Dr mike clark stated in 2004,
REF: Statement by Mike Clark science spokesman on 8th march 2004 “there is little doubt that some people are affected by the presence of masts in their neighbourhoods. This is real and not imaginary.” !!!!
Talk about contradicting themselves, but they still except people to listen, total rubbish!!
There are also thousands of peered reviews stating that there are “REAL HEALTH RISKS”.
Some suggest that if they don’t want to see a “baying mob”, the church should stop treating Friar Park residents with utter contempt and take real notice of their very real concerns.
There is a solution, the church pcc should reject the proposed mast and take its place again as a caring neighbour in the community.
Friar Park never had a problem with the church before, did they?
Report abuse
If this mast is not wanted the council has an obligation to act on people’s wishes.
A mistake of such monumental proportion does not seem like a mistake to some people, it has been said.
Report abuse
Didn’t a similar thing happen down the road in West Bromwich? I heard someone pulled that mast down.
Report abuse
I feel a need to respond to J Elliot’s comment above. You obviously have an agenda you are pushing, since a similar comment from you pops up several times on the web.
Since you are accusing T-Mobile of covering up damaging results, it is unfortunate that you do not reveal the full findings of the Ecolog report on this topic. The quote from the Ecolog report appears to have been truncated to maximise its impact.
The full statement from the 2000 report states:
“Given the results of the present epidemiological studies, it can be concluded that
electromagnetic fields with frequencies in the mobile telecommunications range do play a
role in the development of cancer. This is particularly notable for tumours of the central
nervous system, for which there is only the one epidemiological study so far, examining
the actual use of mobile phones. The most striking result of this study was an obvious
correlation between the side at which the phone was used and the side at which the
tumour occurred. The brain tumour incidence however was only slightly increased. A
(hypothetical) explanation of such a finding could for example be that mobile fields have
a promoting effect on previously initiated (multiple) tumours, triggering a defence
mechanism in the body which is capable of suppressing unpromoted tumours.”
A search for the literature cited in the Ecolog report found the following website documenting studies on cellphone use and cancer:
http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cancernet/600372.html
If you scroll down to “Studies of Cellular Telephone Use and Cancer Risk” the following is stated:
“Results of a study from Sweden were published in the July 1999 issue of the International Journal of Oncology . This study compared cellular telephone use in a group of 209 individuals who had brain tumors (the case group) with a group of 425 people without brain cancer (the control group). The study reported a statistically non-significant increased risk for brain tumors on the side of the head on which the cellular telephone was used. However, researchers found no overall increase in the risk for brain tumors with cellular telephone use.”
The 1999 paper is the one cited by Ecolog, yet the conclusions seem to be different. perhaps something was lost in translation (the Ecolog report was in German), but it is important to bear in mind that an impartial analysis of all the available facts is required, not selecting soundbites to push your own agenda.
Report abuse
Yes you are quite right Mr Bartlett. I assume you represent the phone operators. I have said the same thing frequently on web pages. Because it is happening all the time! That’s why these so called “mistakes” should be investigated by an independant body.
The Ecolog study examined 220 peer reviewed and published research papers and after close scrutiny came to several conclusions, some of which are listed below.
1. Cancer initiating and cancer promoting effects of high frequency electromagnetic fields used by mobile telephone technology.
2. Disruptions of the endocrine and the immune system.
3. Reduction of the concentration of the hormone melatonin in the blood of exposed animals and humans.
4. Effects on the central nervous system, which reach from neuro-chemical effects to modifications of the brain potentials and impairments of certain brain functions.
5. From experiments with volunteers, who were exposed to the fields of mobile telephones, there is clear evidence for influences on certain cognitive functions.
The operator deliberatly buried this report, as it proved to be a damming indictment of the adverse health effects from phones and masts. Why else, Mr phone operator, did T-Mobile bury this report if it supposedly presents a glowing picture of the safety of phone masts! The national press, when reporting this scandal, also highlighted the seriousness of the report’s findings.
So we have over one thousand independant peer reviewed research studies proving these masts are unsafe. Last month, the Panorama TV programme highlighted the dangers of Phone Mast/WiFi technology. Sir William Stewart, the Government’s very own Chief Scientific Adviser and Chairman of the Health Protection Agency, also thinks this technology is unsafe. On the programme he called for a moratorium on the siting of phone masts near schools and housing.
Yes I do have an agenda to push. It is to try and put a stop to this dangerous technology causing even more ill health and cancers. This “agenda” as you put it is what any responsible citizen should be subscribing to. The cancer clusters are increasing at an ever alarming rate around your phone masts. The truth is out and the phone operators are scared that there may be an end in sight for their multi £billion cancerous gravy train.
Report abuse
Why would we believe the ECOLOG report when even the WHO has been infiltrated by the mobile phone industry? There only way find out who is telling the truth is to examine the peer reviewed published studies directly, taking into account who funded them and make a decision based on that. From what I can tell most of the studies that fail to find the evidence are funded by the industry. Indecently a study which doesn’t find a link to cancer doesn’t cancel out one that does. I would therefore consider that the best course of action is a precautionary one. No masts until we can prove they are safe.
Report abuse
J. Elliott, You assume wrong. I have no links to the ‘phone operators other than being the owner of a mobile ‘phone, so calling me “Mr. phone operator” is presumptive and derogatory.
I was not disputing the findings of the studies you cited, merely your selective reporting of those findings. I would urge people to look at the information contained on the webpage I cited earlier and let them draw their own conclusions.
Report abuse
This is a situation which doesn’t arise in Scotland.
The Scottish Parliament changed planning law in 2002, ending the 56 day default provision. So all masts require full planning process. The Councillors must not unduly delay their decision making and this appears to afford reasonable protection for all applicants.
I wonder why Westminster is so slow to sort out this recurring nightmare for the English electorate.
Report abuse
I apologise to Mr Bartlett for accusing him of being a phone operator.
However I must add that the multi £billion phone industry has a very big influence on selective reporting with their multi £million marketing strategy, much of it aimed at MP’s, councillors and local planning authorities. As mentioned earlier there are over 1000 studies showing ill effects from phone masts. The only research alleging no harm is that funded by the phone industry. Unfortunately this is the research that is blindly believed by government yet as we have seen, even the vested interested, phone operator funded research proves a damaging health risk. Quite rightly a public smoking ban has been introduced. Yet ludicrously this government sanctions the installation of phone masts next to schools and housing which pose a far greater risk than smoking. As the scientist Barry Trower said recently, at his address to the Welsh Assembly concerning the health implications of mobile phone masts, “I believe that this Industry, this Government and its scientists, would be responsible for more civilian deaths in peace-time than all of the terrorist organizations in the World, put together”
I urge people to look at the independant research. Look at the NAILA/WOLF/HUTTER/SANTINI/OBERFELD/BAMBERG studies. All show increased cancers/illnesses from this Industry’s microwaves. Go to the Powerwatch, Radiation Research Trust, Masts Sanity or W.A.R.T. websites for the truth about this harmful technology
Report abuse
T.Bartlett said..”I was not disputing the findings of the studies you cited”…YOU CANT DISPUTE THE FINDINGS OF OVER 1000 INDEPENDANT RESREACHES… have you bothered to read them?
they all come to the same conclusion, that phone masts DO have a affect on peoples health.
What is it with you mr Bartlett?
Go and stick your head in a microwave oven as you seem to like it!
PLEASE REREAD THIS STATEMENT..REF: Statement by Mike Clark science spokesman FOR THE HEALTH PROTECTION AGENCY on 8th march 2004 “there is little doubt that some people are affected by the presence of masts in their neighbourhoods. This is real and not imaginary.” !!!!
One more thing mr T.Bartlett, can we put forward your name and address for the consideration of hosting a phone mast in your back garden?
Report abuse