Campaigners raise 5G concerns but council says key policies are set nationally

Questions about the safety of the latest generation of mobile phone technology have been raised with health chiefs by worried campaigners.

Health chiefs told them that they would follow law, policy and guidance including advice from Public Health England, a government agency.

Campaigners opposed to 5G (fifth generation) wireless technology had asked Brighton and Hove City Council to follow the “precautionary principle” after submitting a petition signed by 2,240 people last year.

At the council’s Health and Wellbeing Board, Brighton and Hove’s director of public health Alistair Hill said that Public Health England provided advice on this subject.

The Spearhead

He told the board that exposure levels should comply with the guidelines published by International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

At Hove Town Hall today (Tuesday 28 January), Mr Hill said that peer reviewed research had considered both the long and short-term effects of 5G technology and concluded there were “no adverse health effects”.

He said: “We recognise there is ongoing research and keep ourselves up-to-date within public health in Brighton and Hove and will remain so.

“We absolutely recognise there is concern among some of our residents about this.”

The council’s assitant director for development and regeneration Max Woodford told the board that the council could not stop the spread of 5G from a planning perspective “even if it wanted to”.

He said that the council could object to specific sites based on design and location – for example, those close to a “heritage asset” or on a listed building – but otherwise it could not use planning policy to oppose 5G.

Green councillor Sarah Nield asked a series of questions about the precautionary principle, the effect on insects and why 20-metre masts were turned down at sites near Hove Park, Arundel Street and at the corner of Roedean Road and Marine Drive last year.

Mr Woodford said that plans for the masts were refused based on existing rules because they caused “visual clutter” and harmed the character of the area.

He said that he had no information about the effect on wildlife.

Council lawyer Elizabeth Culbert said that the precautionary principle had been applied by Frome and Glastonbury town councils but neither had responsibility for planning and were not confined by the National Planning Policy Framework.

Brighton is home to Britain’s first non-university-led 5G testbed which was set up in 2017 to link businesses and universities and to try to enable cutting-edge technological innovation.

It is one of the projects backed by the Greater Brighton Economic Board, which includes the council among its member organisations.

The board is also backing the expansion of full-fibre connections, public community wifi and the “internet of things” such as smart traffic management, all of which involve 5G technology.

The Greater Brighton Economic Board was given a progress update earlier today on a digital strategy aimed at modernising the infrastructure across the city region.

At the Health and Wellbeing Board meeting two people asked public questions about 5G technology.

Thorston Manderlay asked who would be held accountable for any future health issues affecting individuals or groups of people related to 5G.

He also asked what studies formed the basis of Public Health England’s advice on the safety of 5G.

Thousands of doctors and scientists around the world, he said, had drawn attention to a lack of independent studies of non-ionising radiation.

Labour councillor Clare Moonan, who chairs the board, said that the council took its guidance from Public Health England and could not set different guidelines to those set nationally.

She said that many of the planning applications for infrastructure such as phone masts would be dealt with under “permitted development rights” which restricted the council’s powers.

Councillor Moonan added that Mr Manderlay would need to contact Public Health England about its policies.

Silvia Cabrera Hidalgo asked why, if 5G is safe, so many insurers, including Lloyd’s, refused to insure against the negative impact of wifi and 5G.

She was also concerned that some people already experienced health problems related to electric and magnetic fields (EMF).

Councillor Moonan said that insurance companies were commercial organisations and were not required to follow the same guidelines as the council.

She added that the council would always “carefully consider” any planning application which related to 5G and give people a chance to comment.

  1. Digital Disconnect Reply

    Key policies are set nationally, but that doesn’t prevent the Council from taking reasonable action to protect the welfare of local residents.

    Indeed, they have a mandate, as per the Health and Social Care Act and various other (e.g. human rights) acts and accords to do exactly that.

    There can be no excuse for wilful compliance with what amounts to a crime against humanity and the environment, and locals will not tolerate cowardice or corruption on such vital issues.

    We must #Stop5G, with or without the help of those who purport to lead and represent local communities. Traitors will surely be unseated and their names blackened by such injurious betrayal of the people. There may very well also be criminal charges/civil damages to face, in time.

    Time for men and women of honour to step up, and puppets to step out.

    Read up, wise up, stand up, and speak out. We must #Stop5G

  2. Joe Stains Reply

    God bless 5G; God bless all-types of fast internet.

    Whining cry-baby’s who don’t want 5G can use two tin cans tied together with a piece of string to communicate with each other…

  3. Janet Brooks Reply

    The 5gspaceappeal.org website allows those of us who oppose 5g to sign an international petition, calling to scrap 5g on Earth and in outer space. The implications to health and wellbeing couldn’t be more disastrous. I wonder if 5g in China has resulted in this coronavirus spread. All infections, bacteria and viruses could swarm around us as if all life on Earth were inside a microwave, infecting us.

    • Alex Edwards-Jones Reply

      Hello Janet Brooks! Could I share your post/reply to FB?? We really need this info out to as many as possible!!
      As you say 5G is a total menace and we aren’t doing enough to stop its Roll out!!
      Cheers
      Alex Edwards-Jones

  4. Wjb Reply

    Don’t need it or want it, seems like the perfect thing to have a referendum on tho? Let each county decide if it wants to take the risk.

  5. bob snoakes Reply

    The rollout of 5G amounts to a violation of our human rights. It is being implemented without our consent – we have a right to live in an environment that is good to health and wellbeing.

    5G uses higher frequency radio signals that have a shorter range and will require more base station sites than the existing networks.

    5G has been halted in the following cities & countries as an example; Netherlands, Russia, Slovenia, Australia, Switzerland, Bad Wiessee – Germany, Laois county Ireland, 100+ Municipalities in Italy, Winchester CC

    EU scientists appeal warns of serious health effects from 5G – https://www.jrseco.com/european-union-5g-appeal-scientists-warn-of-potential-serious-health-effects-of-5g/

Leave a Reply

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.