5G - Suspend and review rollout of 5G infrastructure

Part 4 of 4 (cont'd final)

In the government's response to the initial consultation, at point 62 (page 29 of the report) it states "... The majority of personal respondents expressed concerns in relation to in-principle opposition to the deployment of 5G infrastructure, in particular on grounds relating to public health concerns, and the effects of EMF radiation on the environment, including on wildlife populations." In the summary of this report, at point 5 (page 4) it states "....Having considered the responses to the consultation, we are satisfied that there is evidence to demonstrate that the proposed reforms would have a positive impact..... we will ensure that the appropriate environmental protections and other safeguards are in place to mitigate the impact of new mobile infrastructure...". At point 10 (page 5) it states "In developing the technical consultation, we will work with mobile industry representatives .... including... Ofcom*....."

Part 4 of 4 (cont'd 2)

I will be in touch soon with the details of the new fundraising page on Crowdjustice and with my comments on the Technical Consultation document so that you can submit your own responses asap.
Yours sincerely,

Jessica Learmond-Criqui

* You may recall that the Government's response to this initial consultation was published in a report in July 2020 which is below:

August 2019 Consultation (Proposed reforms to development rights to support rollout of 5G) - Government response link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/902836/Government_Response_Mobile_Planning_Consultation.pdf

Part 4 of 4 (cont'd 1)

This continuing legal activity will have costs and to that end, I will be setting up a new fundraising page to address those costs. We would be grateful for your continued support in relation to those costs. I hope that you will be able to continue to support these endeavours as generously as you have done in the past and thank you all for your fantastic support so far.

If there are no other opportunities for legal challenge, any funds raised which are not used will be donated to the charity ES-UK.info or other similar charity. Many of you will know of es-uk which can be found at http://www.es-uk.info/ which provides:

“unbiased and balanced information to help those who have become sensitive to mobile and cordless phones, their masts, wifi, and a multitude of common everyday electrical appliances”.

Part 4 of 4

This opportunity gives a second bite at the cherry. Our barrister, David Wolfe QC, continues to advise our claimant on this matter and has suggested that we invite you all to put in responses.

If there are particular impacts in certain areas, eg, residential areas, areas close to schools etc, then those should be identified.

Depending on how the government then deals with all of that information, we might have a chance at a further legal challenge.

I will be reviewing the documents in the Technical Consultation and will circulate shortly my responses. You will be welcome to base your responses using mine as a guide.

We will be working with our barrister to review the government’s continuing response and to obtain legal advice on potentials to challenge.

Part 3 of 4

In refusing permission to proceed to judicial review, the Court of Appeal judge referenced this from the Government’s consultation response document)*:

“We will undertake a technical consultation on the detail of the proposals, including appropriate environmental protections and other safeguards, prior to amending the existing legislation and will reassess whether there would be a positive or negative, direct or indirect, impact on people with protected characteristics, and update the Public Sector Equalities Duty assessment as necessary.”

Consistent with that, the Technical Consultation document says this (in paragraph 84 and then Question 11):

“Considering the technical detail of the proposals, we would welcome views on the potential impact of the matters raised in this consultation on people with protected characteristics as defined in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010?”

Part 2 of 4

The technical consultation seeks views on how to implement the proposals consulted on in August 2019 to support the deployment of 5G and extend mobile coverage and is below. Comments have to be in by 14 June, 2021:

Current Technical Consultation link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/changes-to-permitted-development-rights-for-electronic-communications-infrastructure-technical-consultation/changes-to-permitted-development-rights-for-electronic-communications-infrastructure-technical-consultation

Part 1 of 4

Dear All,

Update – 28.5.21

As you know, we applied to the Court of Appeal for permission to proceed to judicial review having been refused permission in the High Court. We have now heard from the Court of Appeal which has refused permission to proceed to judicial review.

This is disappointing news, without doubt. It means that the challenge which we made to the government’s decision to remove planning permission requirements from the siting of masts and antennae was unsuccessful.

But, that is not the end of the story. Some of you know that the efforts to obtain justice for those who suffer from the effects of man-made radiation is a journey. We have been pushed back on the first step on that journey but we are continuing on that journey.

The government’s consultation on the removal of planning permission has another layer - a step 2 - they have started a technical consultation on how they are going to remove this planning permission.

Other legal press around this case:
Jessica Learmond-Criqui and Phillip Watts provided a consumer piece explaining to parents how the 5G rollout could impact our health in Toddle About.
Jessica Learmond-Criqui used the 5G Judicial Review to outline how to get a new disability recognised in the law in Solicitors Journal.
Jessica Learmond-Criqui’s involvement in challenging the government over its 5G strategy was summarised in Edward Fennell’s Legal Diary.

Below is a summary of much of the legal press around this case:

David Wolfe discussed why judicial reviews are so essential to our legal system in The Times.
Jessica Learmond-Criqui outlined the process of persuading the courts to recognise a new illness in Litigation Futures.
David Wolfe explained what local governments need to know about consultation responses in Local Government Lawyer.
In New Law Journal, Jessica Learmond-Criqui examined the government’s decision-making process in relation to the 5G networks. She noted that, shockingly, the ministers making the decision about the 5G rollout were not shown the evidence (collected through a public consultation in 2019) that 5G can negatively impact our health. The piece first published in December and then again in the February edition.

In the meantime, we have had many articles published in the legal press. The link to the latest article in Toddle About is below:

https://toddleabout.co.uk/news/could-the-roll-out-of-5g-negatively-affect-our-health/

Thanks as ever for your support. We are continuing to raise funds which are very much depleted at present. Do please make donations to the below so that we have enough funds to, at the very least, pay our barrister going forward:

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

Just a quick update on the legal action. As you know, we were refused permission to proceed to judicial review in the High Court. Our QC advised that we should appeal and we filed a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal in December.

The Court sealed our notice which I received last week. We are awaiting a translation of the transcript of the judgement in the High Court. Once that is ready, perhaps another week or two, then the papers will be sent to the judge.

The judge will make a ruling on the papers only and without a hearing.

If we are successful in the Court of Appeal, the government may appeal to the Supreme Court. If they do not, then we will have a full hearing for judicial review in the High Court. I will keep you posted.

Today, we had a hearing in the High Court on our Judicial Review application. Judge Sir Ross Cranston refused our application in this round. Having discussed the position with our barrister, we have taken steps to lodge an appeal with the Court of Appeal as soon as possible.

You will recall that we had issued proceedings against the Secretaries of State of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) on the grounds that:

• the decision was not based on compliance with the requirements of a lawful consultation;
• they breached their ‘public sector equality duty’ (“PSED”) under the Equality Act 2010 by not engaging with the fact that particular sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation, including from 5G in particular, amounts to a disability (EHS) for the purposes of the PSED.

We need funds to continue to fight this case. Do continue to donate funding.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

Update on legal campaign (cont'd) - final text

Please go to either of the pages below and donate what you can, including making a monthly contribution so that the fund can be built up to address these issues and issues similar to these to achieve the overall objective. Even a regular monthly donation of say £10 or more a month will move us towards the target.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

Please tell your friends and spread the word.

Update on legal campaign (cont'd) - continued text for update

In the meantime, there are three immediate actions we need to take:

- Object to the UK government’s investment in OneWeb;
- Object to OneWeb’s new filing (since the UK government invested in the bankrupt company) to launch 42,000 satellites (to match SpaceX’s permission also to launch 42,000 satellites); and
- Make representations on a consultation opened until October about legislation for satellites which would include 5G satellites.

There is much work to do and not much time in which to do it. I will send more about these objections etc later.

While some funds have been raised already, it is still below halfway to the £150,000 which I am trying to raise for this campaign.

Update on legal campaign (cont'd) - Fifth of 5 updates

Finally, I will write to you more later about this – but the UK government has just spent £500m (on 27 July) investing in the bankrupt OneWeb which was building 5G satellites for 45% of the company. The government made this investment against the advice of the UK Space Agency and of the relevant department’s Accounting Officer who said that the investment was not “value for money”. A shocking waste of taxpayer’s money.

A company has just got planning permission to build a space port in Scotland and the government has given permission for satellites to be launched from that port. The UK Space Agency has been working on a plan to launch 5G satellites over the UK at least since 2018 that I can find. I will send more information on this with links to read soon.

Update on legal campaign (cont'd) - Fourth of 5 updates

Our legal team continues to consider taking legal action against DHSC/PHE.

While I have seen some objections to the PDR consultation, if any of you made objections, please send them to me asap at jlc@lawlcs.com as they may be helpful in any eventual legal action.

I know that some of you have contributed hugely and generously already. And you would be right to think that a one off contribution should suffice. But, the problem with this situation is that it is like an onion, with many layers and one has to peel off each layer of the onion skin to get at the different parts which form this brutal and inhumane treatment of humanity and our environment. You have all so far been fantastic. I am trying to do all that I can, but I cannot do this alone.

Update on legal campaign (cont'd) - Third of 5 updates

Our legal team obtained some copies of objections to the PDR public consultation which demonstrated the overwhelming submissions of adverse health consequences to humans, bees, trees and birds from such a reckless proposal. The government’s decision barely commented on such representations quoting the usual PHE stance which is known to be deeply flawed and unfit for purpose.

A key part of the legal campaign is to change government policy on the roll out of 5G. Therefore, our legal team has decided to challenge this decision making process through the medium of judicial review promptly and, to that end, have sent a letter before action to the Secretaries of State for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and for the Department of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Do see it below.

https://www.scribd.com/document/473627506/LCS-Practice-letter-to-DCMS-and-DHCLG-final-as-sent-21-8-20-pdf

Update on legal campaign (cont'd) - Second of 5 updates

That would mean, among other things, that planning permission would no longer be needed for masts, antennae and equipment which can then be erected in town centres, neighbourhoods and conservation areas at will and mobile service providers can proliferate this equipment across the country with no oversight by anyone.

The decision includes proposals to “Enable higher new masts to deliver better mobile coverage and mast sharing, subject to prior approval and specified limits”. It is not clear what this means but I have already seen a number of applications for massive 60 foot structures with multiple masts on them currently being made and from this decision it looks like it will be made easier for these types of structures to proliferate in our neighbourhoods.

Update on legal campaign – 27.8.20 – First of 5 updates

You will recall that my legal campaign is to, among other things, change government policy on the roll out of 5G – details of the campaign are at www.5gemfreview2020.com.

During the time that our legal team has been considering taking legal action against the Secretary of State for the Department of Health and Social Care and Public Health England, the government has made the decision to remove the need for planning permission for masts, antennae and equipment. Do see further below.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/902836/Government_Response_Mobile_Planning_Consultation.pdf

They did this after consulting with the public over permitted development rights (“PDR”) which ended in November, 2019.

Update 12.6.20

5G summit expert question time live tonight

There was a live question time with experts at the 5G summit tonight. Do see the link below.

It has a number of different perspectives in 2 hours and is interesting to listen and to see the various points of view.

https://youtu.be/iQKlp7p9lQw

We now have £43,180 on the crowdfunding site with 1,350 donations. This is a fantastic achievement with only 12 days to go. We need to get to £150,000 for this case so do keep distributing the link far and wide. Thank you so much for your support which is deeply appreciated.

For those of you interested in the science behind the concerns about 5G, there is an online 5G summit organised by Green Med Info on 1 June. Entry is free. Dr Martin Pall of Washington State University has also written a book about 5G Risk. The link below will take you to his free book and a free place on the summit.

https://the5gsummit.com/reg-gift/?idev_id=20024&utm_campaign=Solo%3A%205G%20Crisis%20Summit%20-%20Scientific%20Perspective%20eBook%20%28WrYY2E%29&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Daily%20Newsletter&_ke=eyJrbF9lbWFpbCI6ICJqbGNAbGF3bGNzLmNvbSIsICJrbF9jb21wYW55X2lkIjogIksydlhBeSJ9

We now have £38,933 on the crowdjustice site. https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

This is a fantastic endeavour and I encourage you all to continue to spread the word far and wide.

I thought that it may interest you to know that yesterday, there was an inaugural online meeting of lawyers around the world, all working on fighting the roll out of 5G and the satellites which will dowse the earth with radiofrequency radiation. There were at least 30 lawyers in the session. There is a tremendous movement to help each other during these times.

There is a momentum which is building which is exciting and encouraging. We do need to get to £150,000 so please continue to help as much as you can.

Do see the article in the Ham and High regarding the crowd funding campaign.

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/hampstead-woman-jessica-learmond-criqui-s-crowdfunder-to-stop-5g-1-6655967

Do keep supporting the fundraising at the link below:

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

We are raising funds to take legal action against the Secretary of State of the Department of Health and Social Care and Public Health England. Do see the CrowdJustice link below.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

You will see on the target an initial target of £50,000 and a stretch target of £150,000. We really need at least £150,000 for the costs to the end of the hearing. The application will be for judicial review and will be aimed at obtaining a stop to the roll out of 5G infrastructure.

There are 30 days from today to reach £50,000 otherwise I cannot start at all but ultimately we need to reach £150,000.

If you are interested in helping us reach our targets, please donate to the site.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/5g-judicial-review-2020/

Masts and antennae are proliferating across the country at an exponential rate. Prof Butler explains why the current levels are too high and the impact on our health and that of our children and he questions how our government and Public Health England can deem these technologies to be safe.

https://youtu.be/afhLqExpuFE

or

https://www.facebook.com/ilovehampstead/videos/147376353268648/

5G and fertility collapse - do see the article below.

The impact of electromagnetic frequencies on the sperm count of men and the quality of eggs in women is well researched and known. Dr Martin Pall of Washington State University predicts a collapse in the fertility of humankind within 10 years of the rollout of 5G which EMFs will range from 700mHz to 60GHz and above.

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/ham-high-guest-jessica-learmond-criqui-hampstead-campaigner-roll-out-of-5g-technology-puts-fertility-rate-at-risk-1-6420360

We are told it is safe by all government agencies and by mobile service providers. Well, read below, set out in lay person's terms by an ex-lecturer of Imperial College in 2012 explaining the myriad of problems and damage to us humans.

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7022311211.pdf

Do see the article below.

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/opinion-jessica-learmond-criqui-we-must-suspend-5g-roll-out-1-6204140?fbclid=IwAR14rwO846p-KyiQFqhQKDWtWOalrxqOpJn5y-pSnNQNSwibKZe_AQEE3YQ

In relation to the posts below, do start at the bottom and read upwards to see the flow of the information.

“It would irradiate everyone, including the most vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation: pregnant women, unborn children, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill.” - Ronald Powell, PhD, Letter to FCC on 5G expansion.

We are all set to be lab rats in a giant 5G experiment. Who wants to visit their loved ones in hospital while their neighbour plays an enhanced game in the park or their fridge talks to a computer at Sainsburys to order more milk.

It is time for our government to stand up for us, suspend the 5G rollout and review not simply the ICNIRP guidelines, but also the criticisms to them. Brussels has suspended their 5G rollout pending investigations into health concerns. We must too and I call on the government to do so.

END

Articles are beginning to proliferate branding anyone who questions the institutional orthodoxy of safe mobile phone use as believers of conspiracy theories. But a few experts are speaking out.

One such complaining voice is Dr. Martin Pall, the WSU Professor Emeritus, who has done some research on the mechanism of how wireless radiation causes harm in our cells. He says that “Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world”.

“The plans to beam highly penetrative 5G milliwave radiation at us from space must surely be one of the greatest follies ever conceived of by mankind. There will be nowhere safe to live.” - Olga Sheean former WHO employee and author of ‘No Safe Place’.

The ICNIRP argue that the thousands of peer-reviewed studies that have found harmful biologic or health effects from chronic exposure to non-thermal levels of EMF are insufficient to warrant stronger safety guidelines. There are some fundamental criticisms of these guidelines, not least of which is that these guidelines were set for short term exposure and not for long term exposure to EMFs. The guidelines are, therefore, outdated and not fit for purpose.

5G will use pulsed millimeter waves to carry information. But as Dr. Joel Moskowitz points out, most 5G studies are misleading because they do not pulse the waves. This is important because research on microwaves already tells us how pulsed waves have more profound biological effects on our body compared to non-pulsed waves. Previous studies, for instance, show how pulse rates of the frequencies led to gene toxicity and DNA strand breaks.

The denser soup of electrosmog from the 5G infrastructure would threaten our planet’s atmosphere with the burning of tons of fossil fuels to put the thousands of 5G short life satellites into the sky and damage our ecosystems by affecting bird and bee health.

Over 240 scientists and doctors from 41 nations who have published research in the field have appealed to the United Nations calling for urgent action to reduce these ever growing wireless exposures and they wrote the FCC for a moratorium on the roll-out of 5G citing the serious risks to human health and the environment.

The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a non- governmental organization (NGO) based in Germany with self-selected members, has issued guidelines which remain essentially unchanged since 1998. They do not allow for the recognition of radio frequency microwave radiation and MMWs as harmful unless there is a heating effect.

In addition, MMWs may cause our pain receptors to flare up in recognition of the waves as damaging stimuli. The US Department of Defense already uses a crowd-dispersal method called the Active Denial System, in which MMWs are directed at crowds to make their skin feel like it’s burning. It also has the ability to basically microwave populations to death from afar with this technology if they choose to do so. And the telecommunications industry wants to fill our atmosphere with MMWs?

Tests of MMW on animals have shown rare forms of tumour in the brain and heart, DNA damage, damage to the eyes and immune system, thermal injuries to the eyes with thermal effects reaching below the eye’s surface, damage to cell growth rate and even bacterial resistance.

Over 90% of microwave radiation is absorbed by the human skin which basically acts as an absorbing sponge for microwave radiation. Disquieting as this may sound, it’s generally considered acceptable so long as the violating wavelengths are greater than the skin layer’s dimensions. But MMW’s violate this condition.

Furthermore, the sweat ducts in the skin’s upper layer act like helical antennas, which are specialised antennas constructed specifically to respond to electromagnetic fields. With millions of sweat ducts, and 5G’s increased RFR needs, it stands to reason that our bodies will become far more conductive to this radiation. The full ramifications of this fact are presently unclear, especially for more vulnerable members of the public (e.g, babies, pregnant women, the elderly).

Many studies have associated low-level RFR exposure with a litany of health effects, including DNA single and double-strand breaks (which leads to cancer), oxidative damage (which leads to tissue deterioration and premature ageing), disruption of cell metabolism, increased blood-brain barrier permeability, melatonin reduction (leading to insomnia and increasing cancer risks), disruption of brain glucose metabolism and generation of stress proteins (leading to myriad diseases).

The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study on Cell Phone Radiation found “clear evidence” of cancer, heart damage and DNA damage in a $30-million study designed to test the basis for federal safety limits (NIEHS). The heart and brain cancers found in the NTP rats are the same cell type as tumors that researchers have found to be increased in humans who have used cell phones for over 10 years. Thus, researchers say this animal evidence confirms the human evidence (Hardell 2019.)

High-frequency MMWs travel a short distance. Furthermore, they don’t travel well through buildings and tend to be absorbed by rain and plants, leading to signal interference. Thus, the necessary infrastructure would require many smaller, barely noticeable cell towers situated closer together, with more input and output ports than there are on the much larger, easier to see 4G towers. This would likely result in wireless antennas every few feet, on every lamp post and utility pole in your neighbourhood – ie, a lot more transmitters located close to homes and workplaces with inescapable EMF smog everywhere.

In 2011, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radio frequency radiation (“RFR”) as used by mobile phone masts as a potential 2B carcinogen and specified that the use of mobile phones could lead to specific forms of brain tumors.

If you wish to know more about this campaign, please see further detail below which I am posting in the following few posts as there is a word limit per post.

Detail

In the past, mobile broadband networks have been designed to meet the needs of people. Today, 5G technology has been created with the needs of machines in mind - tying all internet connected devices together, ie, over 100 billion devices.

It achieves this by breaking data down into smaller packages, allowing for faster transmission times – 10 to 100 times faster than 4G - permitting machines to achieve near-seamless communication. Faster processing speeds require more bandwidth, yet our current frequency bandwidths are quickly becoming saturated. The idea behind 5G is to use untapped bandwidth of the extremely high-frequency millimeter wave (MMW), between 30GHz and 300GHz, in addition to some lower and mid-range frequencies – this will give off the same dose of radiation as airport scanners.