10:00 - 10 September 2007

Re: The proposed 3G phone mast to be erected in Holton-le-Clay. Here are excerpts from the letter I sent to Graeme Hyde, at East Lindsey Council (as per a leaflet that came through my parents' door in Holton-le-Clay asking them to support the village campaign against this mast):

I write as a concerned parent in regards to the proposed 3G mobile phone mast that is to be erected on Nickerson Way, Holton-le-Clay. Both of my young sons attend Busibodies Day Nursery on Lancaster Way, which is directly next to the proposed site of the mast.I feel that I must express my opposition to these plans on the grounds, not of property values, or interference to electrical equipment, as I do not live in the village, but on something far more important, the health risk to the children that not only attend the nursery but those that frequent both the doctors' surgery and the public house which are in extremely short proximity to the ground that it is proposed the mast will occupy.

I would like to draw your attention to the report by The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP), also referred to as the Stewart Group that was set up in 1999 to examine the possible effects from the use of mobile phones, base stations and transmitters on health.

It published its findings Mobile Phones and Health in May 2000 and shortly afterwards the Government response to this was published which I quote: "The Stewart Group report concluded that the balance of evidence examined suggested that exposures to radio-frequency (RF) radiation below guidelines does not cause adverse health effects to the general population however, there was evidence to suggest that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below these guidelines and also that, at the frequencies used in mobile technology, children will absorb more energy than adults. It was not possible to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, was totally without potential adverse health effects, and that gaps in knowledge were sufficient to justify a precautionary approach."

Surely placing a mast directly next to a nursery and doctors' surgery is foolish and is most definitely not what the Government was advocating when suggesting a "precautionary approach".

I would also like to draw your attention to the following statements and information that have come from both the Government and Mast MAUK has called for children and other vulnerable groups to be protected against potential radiation risks. The Government announced an audit of mast, or base station sites, particularly those located next to schools, by the Radio Communications Agency.

The Government's action was in response to the Stewart Report, which considered current scientific evidence and suggested a precautionary approach. MAUK believes communities and children face an 'unquantifiable risk' in the current regulatory climate.

MAUK says: "The unconstrained ability of mobile phone operators to place base stations in schools and local communities places intolerable strains on the physical and mental integrity of those units and makes a mockery of our parliamentary democracy."

Christine Mangat, MAUK's other co-ordinator, said: "With a mobile phone, you have a choice whether to use it or not. But when a mobile phone mast is sited near you, there is no choice. Children in schools where these masts are sited are subject to these transmissions every day."

Industry figures suggest less than two per cent of the 22,000 base stations are sited on school buildings, yet East Lindsey District Council are proposing to site one only a few metres away from a nursery.

I urge you to think about whether such a site is really appropriate considering the surrounding amenities and community.

Mrs Virginia Anthony, Brereton Avenue, Cleethorpes.