Green Party & 5G FW: Policy Motion - Anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation as a pollutant - Draft 190715

[Soo Chapman]

---

From: 
Sent: 16 July 2019 10:01
To: 
Subject: Policy Motion - Anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation as a pollutant - Draft 190715

 

Hi All,

Below is my suggested introduction to and draft policy to go on the pre agenda forum on Thursday a.m. latest.

If you consider there are critical omissions, incorrect statements or irrelevancies, please let me know by 22.59 Wednesday latest.

I have also posted this on Slack at https://5gmoratoriump-siq2991.slack.com/messages/CKDGUTB7U/

for those who wish to comment there.

Thanks

David

Monday pm 15/07/2019

Introduction

My aim is for this motion to be a basis to support our 5G Moratorium Campaign motion.

I am still waiting for SOC and Policy Development Committee to pronounce on whether Conference can instruct Campaigns Committee to instigate our 5G Moratorium Campaign under an already agreed policy, such as ST301 (Precautionary Principle) and PL304  (To determine socially and environmentally acceptable levels for pollutants).

The early indications are not hopeful so it is likely that our Campaign motion will not be heard at Autumn 2019 Conference. If the proposed draft policy below is accepted at Autumn 2019 Conference, the Campaign motion will go to Spring 2020 Conference.

To maximise the likelihood that this policy will be passed at Autumn 2019 Conference, I have put in only non contentious (IMO) references, so that as little as possible can be objected to or subject to amendment or being referred back.

This means that many of your suggestions do not appear in this motion. They will be part of our discussions whilst drafting our Campaign motion for Spring 2020.

If by some chance, SOC and Policy Development Committee decide our Campaign motion can go to Autumn 2019 Conference, then both motions will go in, which will require some hurried pressured drafting.

Policy Motion - Anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation as a pollutant - Draft 190715

(To be inserted as PL307 in the Objectives section of the Pollution Policies)

Synopsis

To recognise anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation as a pollutant and where appropriate to apply the Precautionary Principle, in line with the mounting peer-reviewed science revealing wide-ranging ecological and biological effects below permitted levels.

Motion

To recognise and control anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation, ranging from low frequencies to sub-millimetre waves, as a pollutant.

Anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation has been shown in peer-reviewed studies to have clear biological and environmental effects and be harmful to public health and ecology.

In line with Policy ST301, where we are uncertain or ignorant of the magnitude or likelihood of the harmful effects of anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation, the Precautionary Principle must be applied.

Policies RR207 and DY100 are concerned with rights, responsibilities, discrimination and disability. The Green Party aims to tackle discrimination and it therefore follows that special consideration should be given to the rights of those suffering from Electro-Sensitivity.

On January 17th, 2019, the French Court of Cergy-Pontoise ruled for the first time that Electromagnetic Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) is an occupational disease that can be developed also from exposure to levels of radiation which are considered to be safe by the government (if they can be injurious as the court ruled then they are clearly unsafe).[1]

The Swedish Government classes Electro-Sensitivity as a disability and funds sufferers to fit protection in their homes.  Sweden estimates that between 3% and 15% of its citizens suffer from Electro-Sensitivity.

In the UK there may be up to 2 million sufferers, and within the Green Party up to 1000 members so affected who, under the new Constitution, may form an Affiliated Group.

All humans should have the right to be able to avoid exposure to significant harmful quantities or qualities of anthropogenic electromagnetic field radiation. For the Electro-Sensitive, for which any adult or child is at potential risk, this right will be paramount.  

As our Green Party MP, Caroline Lucas says recently in a letter to her constituents “Whilst the genie is out of the bottle in terms of current levels exposure to radio waves, we can still protect those that might be vulnerable to new programmes”

Supporting Comments and References

The above motion is directly supported by already approved Green Party Political Strategies, Programs and Policies, shown below.

Political Strategy

Courage – the Green Party is not tied to vested interests and has the courage to address the problems facing us all and to be honest about the future we all share.

Political Programme

One of the 10 key points of our political programme says “Elected Greens will work to End Discrimination”.

Our Existing Agreed Relevant Policies include the following:-

Record of Policy Statements Oct 18, 2016 ... The primacy of the precautionary principle must be maintained over the scientific principle in assessing acceptability of industrial processes.

ST201 Science and technology have made enormous contributions to our civilisation and wellbeing. However, irresponsible use of science and technology have undoubtedly resulted in problems for society, We recognise that when used responsibly science and technology have great potential to be part of the solution to many problems, including environmental ones, However, we recognize that that there are very unlikely to be any technological ‘quick fixes’ and that science needs to be part of a coordinated response alongside political and economic solutions.

ST300 We will support the development of technology that promises to benefit society and the planet, However we believe that technology must be regulated as outcomes may be malign. We do not believe that technological fixes alone will deal with the serious problems facing the planet.

ST301 There is a risk that further rapid technological change will bring about new and catastrophic threats to human survival and flourishing, and to the natural world. In line with our moral obligations to future generations, the Green Party supports the creation of a law formalising the Precautionary Principle to be applied to technologies that pose a plausible risk of ecocide, catastrophe or human extinction. The Precautionary Principle applies especially to those risks where we are uncertain or ignorant of their magnitude or likelihood.

PL300 To negotiate effective international and national agreements for pollution control and minimisation, and to ensure their implementation at local levels through industry, agriculture and society at large.

PL301 To continuously monitor the environment using agreed protocols to ensure comparability of data and to ensure the effective transmission of all relevant data on pollution between states through international agencies such as the United Nations.

PL302 To require industries to systematically audit and publish their use of toxic chemicals, and to establish binding timetables to reduce such use.

PL303 To guarantee the public's right to know about chemical usage and emissions.

PL304 To determine socially and environmentally acceptable levels for pollutants based on both chronic and interactive effects. Environmental and health considerations will be given precedence over economic factors in the determination of such levels.

PL305 To guarantee the public's right to know about the health and environmental aspects of pollution and to actively promote environmental education.

PL306 To introduce environmental impact and improvement analysis into all public planning decisions, and to ensure free public access to the evidence used in both the analysis and in the final assessment.

PL431 Individuals and organisations concerned with generating pollution will be held responsible for the costs of control and for any damage caused, however remote in time or distance. There will be no Crown immunity.

PL432 If suggestive evidence emerges that a pollutant or product may have an adverse effect on the health of humans or the environment, a levy will be placed on the process sufficient to pay for scientific research on the link between pollutant and effect. If a causal association seems reasonable, but the harm is not sufficient to justify the banning of the pollutant or product, a levy will be placed on the process sufficient to pay for the extra health or environmental service work caused by the product.

DY100 This policy relates to all disability, sickness and mental health issues. This includes hearing and vision and brain differences of all kinds. We recognise that many impairments such as those relating to sight, hearing and intellect are not visible or apparent.

RR207 While seeking to maintain equity in meeting people's needs, people have responsibility for ensuring the absence of discrimination in ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, language, religion or other opinion, age, national or social origin, economic status or any other social, physical or mental condition.
Actions and statements on radiation by Caroline Lucas, Green Party MP , MEP, and Advisory Board Member of the Radiation Research Trust
“She has used her position to commission EU research that showed safety guidelines for mobile phone masts are completely inadequate. Caroline has also submitted a Written Declaration (similar to an Early Day Motion) on the risks of exposure to electromagnetic field from radio frequency antennae and mobile telephones, and has called for more research into new technologies such as TETRA.”
https://www.greenparty.org.uk/people/caroline-lucas.html

"Research conducted on behalf of the European Parliament has demonstrated those safety guidelines governing the exposure of radiation to the public from mobile phone base stations are inadequate.”

"In the face of real health risks we should adopt the precautionary principle and stop allowing masts to be built at sites which are close to residential areas. However, the planning laws make it difficult for local authorities to take risks to human health into account when deciding whether to give phone operators permission to erect masts.”

"The government must review the legislation and require local councils to properly apply the precautionary principle, when considering the siting of mobile phone masts.”

Pollution

1. RF-EMR is an environmental pollutant with cytotoxic (toxic to cells) effects.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2047487317734898

2. Classified alongside chemicals, smoke, and asbestos as “pollutants” electromagnetic fields (EMF) poses a high risk to various persons such as users of electrical power, electrical power generating companies, power transmission companies, and large generators.
Sources of possible EMF health risks include radio frequencies, extremely low frequencies, and static magnetic fields. In homes, EMF exposures come from electrical appliances. The public has targeted cell phone manufacturers and electric power lines as likely EMF targets. Electromagnetic Fields (Utilities) Liability Insurance is a way for prudent companies to minimize exposure to vexatious litigation and adverse publicity.
https://completemarkets.com/Electromagnetic-Fields-Utilities-Liability-Insurance/Storefronts/

3. Pollution is defined as the introduction of contaminants into the natural environment that cause adverse change. Pollution can take the form of chemical substances or energy, such as noise, heat or light. Pollutants, the components of pollution, can be either foreign substances/energies or naturally occurring contaminants.

4. Wikipedia defines a pollutant as a substance or energy introduced into the environment that has  undesired effects, or adversely affects the usefulness of a resource.

Legal Judgements

On January 17th, 2019, the French Court of Cergy-Pontoise ruled for the first time that Electromagnetic Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) is an occupational disease that can be developed also from exposure to levels of radiation which are considered to be safe by the government (if they can be injurious as the court ruled then they are clearly unsafe).

The importance of the decision is not only that it’s another decision which recognizes EHS / Microwave Sickness as a condition caused by exposure to wireless radiation but by recognizing that if the exposure to electromagnetic radiation was for the purposes of work, the EHS developed from the exposure may be considered an Occupational Disease. This decision should make employers concerned as it may lead to widespread liability.
https://wearetheevidence.org/french-court-recognized-electromagnetic-sensitivity-as-an-occupational-disease/