Nelson Church targeted for phone mast
[15.02.2006]
Residents on Railway street in Nelson have recently received a letter from QS4, a site acquisition company who focus on hiding controversial mobile phone masts in churches.
The site acquisition company specialise in convincing Parochial Church Councils to lease their church properties to mobile phone operators in return for an annual fee.
According to the letter received by Cloverhill residents on the 9th Feb, the company are appointed by the 'Archbishops' Council of the Church of England as an 'approved' site provider and has a 'thorough knowledge and understanding of all aspects of the industry and is committed to high standards of health and safety'.
Local residents have not forgotten a proposal to install a mobile phone mast near Walverden reservoir last year. Somehow, the terms 'health and safety' and 'phone mast' don't go together very well, and objections have already been sent to the company from irate residents.
The company also states the objective of the letter is to hear residents' views before deciding to seek permission from the Diocese of Blackburn to proceed with the development and install the mast within the church.
- This means our Church roof will have to be partly demolished to make way for the mast. This is simply unacceptable!
Since the building is part of the Parochial Church Council, it is exempt from going through planning procedures and does not need Pendle Council's planning permission, only that of the Diocese.
Why choose a Church to host a phone mast?
In light of health concerns due to long-term exposure to phone mast radiation, mobile operators are constantly looking at ways of avoiding public consultation by erecting masts on existing structures thus bypassing planning procedures.
Unlike other structures, any 'Church of England' building (church) registered on behalf of a Parochial Church Council is exempt from the usual planning regulations. Churches are usually located in elevated locations and with the added bonus of having 'steeples' are a prime target for mobile phone operators.
- However, it beggers belief that St. Bede's church has been selected since it is not in an elevated location, nor does it have a church steeple!
The site acquisition company in their letter to the Cloverhill residents immediately draws attention to health concerns by stating that unlike other phone mast sites they 'force operators to measure levels of emissions in churches routinely'.
This seems bizarre, since no statutory law exists to actually 'enforce' an audit of emissions from a particular phone mast site.
Ironically, the site agent claims 'the installation will not have any detrimental visual effect on the church'. Again, this is a very strange claim since the rest of the paragraph states the plans haven't been finalised? How can a resident comment on a development they cannot see?
The letter concludes to the effect that due to the 50 million users of mobile phones, these base station masts are needed to provide coverage and if the church is not used then more low-powered masts may appear on lamp posts or in garage forecourt signs.
This concluding paragraph misleads the reader since the transmitter to be installed inside the church would be a high-powered 'macrocell' transmitter mast, whereas the paragraph refers to the lower-powered 'microcells' usually installed in car parks and sometimes on petrol forecourts. That is, if the proposed mast actually was a lamppost type microcell, the church would obviously not be needed, since the nearest lamp post would suffice.
Planning guidance states that 'health concerns' are a material consideration yet this guidance would be ignored if the company decided to go ahead and install the mast against residents wishes.
- Is it morally right for the Church to impose real stress on the lives of their neighbours?
The letter states that St. Bedes Church would benefit from the rent received for the mast. This contradicts previous statements from other parochial church councils where it was stated that the revenue would go to the Archbishop's Council, with possibly 'some' allowance made to the upkeep of a particular church.
- So what proportion of this income will go to St. Bede's ?
It is clear from the notification that the site acquisition company are seemingly exploiting parochial church councils to enable the covert rollout of a potentially dangerous technology that will profit the few against the wishes of the many.
The National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) stated in their latest report that they are uncertain about the long-term health effects from microwave radiation and that a 'precautionary approach' should be adopted by siting masts away from schools.
- Is this the best way to raise funds for the church by creating a feeling of unrest and uncertainty?
The residents of Cloverhill and other wards in Pendle would agree, that whatever their faith, the philosophy behind most religions is that of "care for one's neighbour".
We believe that the church must demonstrate its responsibility to those who live in the local community, and whose health may be threatened by the siting of masts in churches where there are homes or schools nearby.
How to object to the Church proposal
To object to the proposal it is IMPORTANT that you write to the Church Project manager at QS4 Limited quoting reference number A11962 before Friday the 24th February 2006. The address to write to is shown below..
Simon Talbot
QS4 Limited
Cody Technology Park
Ively Road, Farnborough
Hampshire
GU14 0LX
You do NOT have to be a Cloverhill resident to object to the proposal, anyone who uses the church as a place of worship or visits the church or lives or works in the surrounding area should also object. When writing, consider what's been said in the 'letter to residents' and this News article. *If you do use St. Bede's Church as a place of worship it's worth mentioning that if the mast is installed you may have to err on the side of caution and consider using a different place of worship.
You should also consider sending a copy of your objection letter to St. Bede's vicar, C.O Father Alan Pierce Jones SSC, The Vicarage, Bentley Street, Nelson, BB9 0BS
The St. Bede's vicars email is: fr.alan@apj.org.uk
Email QS4: You should in the first instance WRITE a letter of objection to QS4. If you wish to backup your comments you can email a copy of your typed letter to QS4 at: info@qs4.com
 Back to Top
Editors Notes
In 1999, mobile phone operators took a huge gamble and anticipated existing mobile phone users would upgrade to the new 3G phone network which enables small video clips and emails to be downloaded from a new type of phone. For use of the 3G licences, the UK government took over £22.5 Billion with a penalty imposed on operators if they hadn't rolled out their new 3G mast network by December 2007.
Because the 3G product was not market led, demand has been slow on the uptake with the majority of existing users satisfied with their 2G phones, which use voice & text calls. Nevertheless, the mobile operators devised all new ways of getting the masts up before the 2007 deadline with little or no public consultation using any available structure, even to the extent of hiring companies to make the masts 'undetectable'. Back to Top
|
