Login Register

Phone masts - a game of pass the parcel

By Staffordshire Newsletter  |  Posted: April 19, 2014

phone mast

Comments (1)

RELAX, there are no health concerns about mobile phone masts. After a meeting with Vodafone, extensive research, and a close perusal of a World Health Organisation Report, Councillor Robert Stephens came to this conclusion when supporting the proposal to build a 50-ft mast adjacent to Walton High School.

Originally the member for Milford had opposed the proposal but after his “highly beneficial to both parties” meeting with Vodafone he experienced a Damascene conversion and conveyed the impression that mobile masts were the best thing since sliced bread.

Fortunately this insane proposal to build a mast, with accompanying furniture, so close to this 1,400-pupil school was unanimously defeated and Councillor Stephen’s voice was the one crying in the wilderness.

The community of Weeping Cross and Walton-on-the-Hill including the 92 people who sent in written concerns owe a debt of gratitude to the 14 councillors who almost instantaneously threw out the application.

Related content

Councillors Heenan, Edgeller, Millichap and Hollinshead displayed logic, insight, experience, passion and humour as well as an awareness of the depth of local opposition. Particularly gratifying was the extent of cross party support in the defeat of the proposal.

The instruction to vacate the police HQ site has sent the mobile phone companies into a tailspin and created what is in effect a bizarre game of pass the 50ft mast - one could alight on a space near to you at the drop of a hat.

The government and the mobile phone companies are desperate for the revenue that mobiles create and are highly likely to produce one-sided dossiers in support of their desired outcomes. The planning system has even added another to the list of things you can’t say to stop us doing what we really want to do, namely, thou shalt not cite health concerns over mobile masts

Those of you who are next in line for these applications would do well to seek a more balanced view of the mast issue than that provided by the council member for Milford and the market hungry phone companies.

Peter Plant


Read more from Staff Newsletter

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters
  • Agnesingvars  |  April 21 2014, 1:44AM

    Thank you Peter Plant for your excellant reporting. And Thank You to the inhabitants of Walton-on-the-Hills for objecting to this planning application to protect your young and your families. The True immidiate health consequences of a mobile mast from a neighbouring mobile mast is devestating for many, granted not for all, but that might not be true in the long run. Even the WHO through IARC has Had to admit (cancer classification 2b), that Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) from wireless masts/phones/Wi-Fi/Smartmeters and other gadgets could be cancer causing took them years to admit, and many more to admit publicly, Cancer cases of any kind have manyfolded in the last 20 years (or for as long as the wireless/mobile telephony has existed in the greater public demain) , the NHS is really struggling with the serious increase in cancer patients, and it now Seems Normal to expect That You WILL get Cancer at some point in your life! And that is Not mentioning the other lifechanging effects of "Your Friendly Neighbourhood Mobile Mast" like the inability to sleep, (which we are told is a main cause of obesity) the nausea, the skinrashes, the headaches, the loss of concentration, the loss of balance, tinnitus etc. These effetcs do not seem to count as a lifechanging, unwanted, but forced upon us, abuse by Governments (who fill up their treasury chest from with the revenue from users) and their hired "Scientists and Quangos" (Special Personal interests from the Insurance Industry?) Or the Serious Bodily Abuse by the Wireless Industry, who are on a real winning profit streak, but have succeded for years in burying their Own Research Studies which showed Great Bodily Harm to humans, the wildlife, and our environment as a whole. Only the few "Positives" showing No Harm have been published (though a few Negatives, from whistleblowers can be found by searching hard) from the radiation emitted from this "Technology". The planning law is totally skewed for the industry, against the citizen, by stating that councils Cannot refuse on "Health Concerns" and notice that it can Only be objected to by taking the matter to Civil Court, which by the cost alone rules most civilians out of beeing able to get justice, and the judgements will count in favour of the industry in any case anyway. (my personal experience). So Hurray for you brave folks. Keep up the good work, as you can count on that the Industry Will Be Back with a new application. (And be warned, they (Industry) always plan so their applications come to planning decisions around holidays, Christmas, Easter, Summer Holidays, as they hope We are otherwise occupied) Best regards. Agnes ingvarsdottir. agnes@mast-victims.org