This is a compilation of three items, one from 2001, the second from 2003 and the third today's 'The Liberal' newspaper.
Martin
Subject:
Precautionary Principle
Date: Fri 29 Jun 2001 12:56:36 -0300
From: "Michael P. Milburn"
I thought the
list would be interested in yesterday's ruling by the Supreme Court
of Canada on pesticides. Pesticides like
the microwaves from cell phone systems are potentially hazardous.
As with microwaves there are uncertainties about the extent of the
risk uncertainties that industry has used to reduce regulatory action
at the federal level. Of course there are too many cases of federal
politicians being influenced more by industry than the citizens that
elect them. A Canadian town Hudson just outside of Montreal banned
pesticides some 10 years ago. The industry challenged the law in
court arguing that local communities can't enact laws more stringent
than federal regulations. Sound familiar! The case made it all the
way to the Supreme
Court. Yesterday the court ruled that communities have the right to
protect their citizens even against presumed hazards irrespective of
federal regulations. And it
specifically upheld the precautionary principle. That's a positive
trend in favor of democracy and public health and rare on this
continent. Certainly relevant to the city of Toronto's attempt to
limit rf/microwave exposure.
Best
Mike Mike Milburn
PhD
Author of Electromagnetic FIElds and Your Health
See court ruling: http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Hudson-Quebec-Bans-Pesticides.htm#sup
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bell Shareholders report from 2003 !!!
"HEALTH CONCERNS ABOUT RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS
Media reports
have suggested that some radio frequency emissions from cell phones
may be linked to medical conditions, such as cancer. In addition,
some interest groups have requested investigations into claims that
digital transmissions from handsets used with digital wireless
technologies pose health concerns and cause interference with hearing
aids and other medical devices.
The findings of these kinds of studies could lead to government regulation, which could have a material and negative effect on our business. Actual or perceived health risks of wireless communications devices could result in fewer new network subscribers, lower network usage per subscriber, higher churn rates, product liability lawsuits or less outside financing being available to the wireless communications industry. Any of these would have a negative effect on us and other wireless service providers."
David Livingstone
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.theliberal.com/News/Richmond%20Hill/article/71859
Bell won't answer call as residents slam tower to be built 'near kids'
Mar 25, 2008 06:30 AM
Effort to delay construction
falls on deaf ears: mayor
By:
Caroline Grech
Despite protests and threats to change service providers,
construction is set to start on a Bell cellphone tower today at the
corner of Bathurst Street and Elgin Mills Road.
The move comes
amid protests from nearby residents who say placing a tower so close
to a residential neighbourhood puts their health and safety at
risk.
Richmond Hill Mayor Dave Barrow sent notice to residents
Friday and said despite appeals from the town, there’s nothing
that can be done to stop the tower, which will go up on the southeast
corner of the intersection.
Mr. Barrow asked Bell to delay
construction until an alternate location could be found.
“We’ve
tried. We’ve written the letters,” Mr. Barrow said,
adding Bell feels they’ve done their due diligence.
Rhonda
Pomerantz-Kula, a member of PACT of Richmond Hill (precautionary
approach to cellular transmissions) said the company has not done
enough.
“I don’t believe they need it. They
haven’t shared what the other alternatives are,” Ms
Pomerantz-Kula said. “We’re not going to just roll over
and go away. Bell doesn’t care about setting up towers near
kids.”
Part of the problem with the location is a
nursery school close by, Ms Pomerantz-Kula said.
Critics of
cell towers claim the electromagnetic fields produced are a health
threat. However cellphone companies argue their towers give off
electromagnetic fields that are within government safety
guidelines.
The group of about 350 residents, is concerned
about five proposed towers in Richmond Hill.
The Bell tower
was approved by Richmond Hill council in April 2007. Ms
Pomerantz-Kula admitted that approval made stopping the tower an
uphill battle.
She said she and her group want to work with
the town to find better places for towers.
Meanwhile, the
company has been flooded with letters from angry residents
threatening to quit using Bell.
“After all this
controversy, I am very disappointed in your attitude and the way you
completely dismiss us,” resident Luca Balestrieri wrote. “I
will take my business and that of everyone I know to another company
for disregarding the safety of children!”
Another
resident, Gilda Rovan, blamed Ottawa for the problems.
“If
there’s anybody to blame it’s the federal government.
They have no business allowing Bell to come into this community. They
should be protecting us, not big corporations,” Ms Rovan
said.
While some residents have taken their business to other
companies in protest, Bell isn’t the only company with a
proposal to build a tower at that intersection.
Rogers is also
planning a tower for the northeast corner.
In November a
public consultation held at the Elgin West Community Centre drew
hundreds of residents, all voicing opposition to any towers being
built.
Councillors are expected to vote on the construction of
the Rogers tower May 12.
However, it is Industry Canada that
has the final say over whether or not a cellphone tower will be
built.
“Municipalities need to have more responsibility
than to just look at them (towers) as just buildings,” Ms
Pomerantz-Kula said.