Mobile Phone Mast Planning Applications

[jeffkinn]

We see a lot of posts on here from customers moaning about the coverage in their area - usually with good reason.

However, what people all too often forget about is that the networks always have an uphill battle with local authorities and resident during the planning process. We all want a good mobile signal but we don't want a mast anywhere near us. This story is typical

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/ashford-residents-never-right-object-9902290

As customers we need to get real - if we want to use phones we need to have masts in as many places as possible.

Or do we?  Thoughts?

[Trevelson]

Any doubts about the fears surrounding mobile phone masts, have a look at the legislation below...

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013L0035

[Trevelson]

I totally agree but it should also be appreciated that communities do not want the imposition of eyesores in their lively villages. A mobile phone mast simply does not fit in visually in many locations. A sympathetic considered approach would cause far less public dismay and may even get better revenue by local populations changing to a supplier who does consider visual aspects as well as the feelings of local people. Failure to do so will undoubtably reduce the revenue of firms who ignore local feelings.

In Dorset EE see to be winning over huge shares of users by being thoughtful and not imposing ugly masts structures just because they can !

[Trevelson]

With the greatest of respect the villagers and yes, that includes me want a better phone signal. Living in a lively area of Dorset there are masses of area for such a mast, local land owners have offered suitable land but Vodaphone insist on a very large very visible mast in the middle of the village. We are so incensed that many of us have changed over to EE who do provide a good signal locally with no intrusive mast. We are not trying to stop progress but want a balanced approach, something that seems lacking in the actions Vodaphone are taking in this village.

should Vodaphone be successful the door will be open for every village to be forced to accept a mast close to houses, this when there is huge amounts of more suitable land locally but away from houses.

---

@jeffkinn wrote:
You might have a good signal but there are obviously people in your area that don't. Its attitudes like this that are keeping millions of people in so called Not Spots. A mobile signal these days is not a luxury but an essential service and to that end more masts need to be erected and upgraded. I suggest you come to terms with it and stop castigating companies who are doing what their customers want them to do.

---

[Trevelson]

@jeffkin . Then I’m afraid companies that do not consider public opinion will lose market share as people will simply move suppliers or simply ditch the mobile phone all together. Strangely the world worked before mobile phones..

I for one would like to see a responsible approach from telecommunications companies, it seems however that their greed is paramount and market share is all..

im not sure if your old enough to remember the issues around smoking, huge companies told the world that you needed to smoke, simple beings that we are many did follow the party line and smoked. Sadly it was all one huge con based upon greed, the result was that known facts were surprised and people died, many people died.

 There are facts emerging that show that sub thermal effects can and do cause health risks, it’s my guess that further generations will be seeking retribution from the firms that currently tell us all is well with the mobile phone world.

I am no Luddite, I have used technology all my life but realise a cause and effect issue with doing so.

There is legislation in place that limits employees exposure to the effects of EMF and other emissions, the effects are the same for all of us soft squishy human beings, a short exposure for an employee may well not compare with year long exposure to the same effects for a person living near one of the dangerous structures.

[jeffkinn]

The world worked before mobile phone, landlines and TV. So what? Do you think that we can put the genie back in the bottle? It's a silly argument and one that detracts from the health point you're making which may or may not have any merit. The smoking analogy falls down as well as there is no comparison between the two situations. Perhaps a closer example might be the man who walked in front of a car with a flag to warn people of oncoming danger and also because it was felt that the human body couldn't survive travelling at more than 10 MPH.

Market share is drive by demand not by corporate greed. There are now more mobile phone connections than people in this country. Vodafone customers, and those of all networks, are demanding better and more signals. The government has instigated consultations about so-called not spots.

If you are in possession of objective scientific evidence that shows mobile signals are damaging to human health please share them with us.

[Trevelson]

I’m sorry but market share is what all telecommunications companies crave, it’s a simple matter of wealth.

[jeffkinn]

All companies want to increase their market share but unless they are providing a service that people want and need they won't make any headway will they. Esso wants to sell more petrol than BP even though it's a homogenous product. They'll build more petrol stations and partner with Tesco to achieve that. Are they evil to do so? Is the accumulation of wealth inherently bad? You should bear in mind that Vodafone is a UK success story and a large portion of any pension or insurance fund you might be involved with will have Vodafone shares in their portfolio.

Mobile phones are now like gas and electricity. It's a utility and it's a basic right of every Uk citizen to be able to acces a mobile phone signal. The adoption of smartphone technology across all age ranges has dramatically increased recently:

https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/press-releases/articles/uk-public-glued-to-smartphones.html

[Trevelson]

the smoking analogy is accurate and the obvious efforts to promote something that “ may cause long term harm” cannot be dismissed.

You may be younger and may well live to wish evidence had not been ignored. ICNIRP guidelines - and remember they are merely guidelines are insufficient to warrant the safety of the populous, this fact was highlighted years ago by the EU. The EU legislation I have noted on this site clearly shows emerging health risks. Lloyd’s of London have a whole team looking at emerging risks and guess what , they do include health dangers caused by the telecommunications devices currently in use.

you as many others use these devices to your hearts content and I can only wish you good health and a lengthy life, please do not be flippant and dismiss genuine fears and growing evidence.

[jeffkinn]

---

wrote:

you as many others use these devices to your hearts content and I can only wish you good health and a lengthy life, please do not be flippant and dismiss genuine fears and growing evidence.

---

Please provide objective evidence of the growing evidence. Anecdotal evidence is not acceptable - nor is any personal aversion to mobile phones. 

[Trevelson]

Please read the EU legislation. Any questions should be directed at them not me.