黄泉安：电讯公司若有损失 可起诉非政府组织

■ 黄泉安指槟州免费无线上网的计划并没触礁。

光华日报

二零一一年三月十九日 凌晨十二时十七分

（槟城18日讯）槟州电讯设施特别工作组主席黄泉安认为，电讯公司及大马多媒体委员会有责任向非政府组织解释有关电磁波辐射的种种问题，若电讯公司认为非政府组织的举动造成公司营业损失，他们可采取法律途径起诉非政府组织。

也是槟州首长林冠英幕僚长的黄泉安今日向媒体透露，4大电讯巨头，即“明讯”、“数码”、“天地通”及“P1”，因遭非政府组织多次以电磁波辐射对人体有害的理由，反对电讯公司建立电讯基建，导致业者每年损失6700万令吉。

4大巨头首脑昨日齐会见林冠英，向林冠英透露业者所面对的共同困境，他们反映的困境包括，非政府组织反对49个基建地点、世遗区11个难题地点；占全槟36%涵盖面的据点被拆，影响55万1000名手机用户；业者直接损失6700万令吉，这还不包括用户面对不便而蒙受的损失。

黄泉安指出，林冠英已向电讯公司表明州政府将坚持以民为本的立场，电讯业者该自己解决他们所面对的问题，包括向州政府申请合法化其电讯基建。同时，州政府将依据科学及国际电讯规格处事，并在近期决策电讯基建后“漂白期”的课题。

于去年12月31日“漂白期”期限过后，黄泉安表示槟州目前仍有135个电讯基建未向州政府申请合法化，104个正在处理当中及131个因不符合安全指南已被驳回申请。

他表示，向非政府组织解释电磁波辐射标准准则区别，应该是电讯公司及大马多媒体委员会的工作，州政府只依据科学及国际电讯规格行事，他也说，若电讯公司认为非政府组织导致电讯业经济上的损失，大可采取法律行动。

引进光纤网络　覆盖面胜狮城

黄泉安透露，他正与4个伙伴合作引进光纤网络到槟城，届时槟州的网络覆盖面及速度将可媲美新加坡，这计划预计将在今年底前完成。

他指出，他们将于非大马电讯（TM ）合作建立300公里都会光纤衔接网，催化良性竞争，并追求成为世界第一流网络设施及建立中性电信运营商（carrier-neutral）网络。

没接入点怎上网　促胡栋强先了解

槟民青团团长胡栋强日前指吉宁万山及新街，无法使用州政府免费上网服务，对此黄泉安指出，在吉宁万山及新街并未设有接入点，胡栋强应该先去了解槟州各接入点的位置后，才批评州政府。

他说，槟州共有750个免费上网的无线热点（hotspot），其中乔治市设有171个接入点，目前共有5万个注册用户，每天活跃者约3500名，不过在吉宁万山及新街并未设有接入点。

黄泉安也反驳有媒体指槟州政府免费无线上网计划触礁的批评，他表示槟州10个国会选区都有接入点，包括威省及大山脚，州政府免费无线上网的计划得到了一定的成功。

用户每半小时自动离线

他表示，为了避免网络瘫痪，用户每半小时将自动离线，同时不能下载。他说，有些民众上不了网是因为智慧型手机或电脑操作系统不受支撑，当然也有可能是登入程序错误，若民众上网面临问题，可播电04－6421591询问。

出席记者会者，还包括与州政府合力推动免费无线上网计划的REDTONE通讯有限公司槟城区副经理温室帏。

曹观友：以民为本　不为电讯公司说话

槟州地方政府委员会主席曹观友指出，槟州民联政府秉持以民为本的宗旨，不会代表电讯公司发言，电讯公司该自己解决其电讯基建面对人民反对的种种问题。

但他表示，若电讯公司重新向政府申请合法化，州政府将会提供一站式的服务加速在3周内批准合法化有关电讯基建。

• VICTOR SCHUKOV

SATURDAY, MARCH 12, 2011

Where would I put a cell phone tower?

POSTED BY VICTOR SCHUKOV AT 7H48

To start with, I would like to tell Rogers Communications executives where they can put their cell phone towers. But that would make my blog only three words long. So allow me to embellish…

To recap, active Pointe-Claire residents are meeting with Rogers mercenaries to dispute three prospective municipal locations that have been approved by council. As a Pointe-Claire denizen, I choose to rise to the occasion and speak up:

A good friend of mine who I shall name Charlie (because I made him up) told me that he lives right next to one of these Martian contraptions and that every morning he wakes up with a blinding headache and nausea. It has come to the point that he cannot even get himself up on Monday mornings to take out his blue box that is overfilled with bottles of vodka, scotch and gin.

It is a common belief that the towers emit harmful sinusoidal radio frequency radiation that can affect the health of those in close proximity. Rogers executives say that this is not the case. If so, an obvious solution would be to pop these towers in the living rooms of Rogers executives. The only problem here is that these millionaires all live in Toronto. The alternative is therefore to install the toxic wave-makers on the front lawns of Pointe Claire councillors who approved the whole thing to start with. Unfortunately, these civic servants have neighbours, so that won’t fly.

Gazette reader Susan Weaver has written in with some useful facts that permit me to not have to do any actual research on the subject like: the towers are over 22.5 meters tall and that “they are not intended for improved cell phone coverage or 911 but for G3 and G4 technology (games and videos.)” - I don’t know what that means because I never played any video game more sophisticated than “Pong” but thank you, Susan, for classing up my article.

And now for a spoonful of devil’s-advocating clarity:

I do not own a cell phone because I am one of those expiring dodo birds who believes that once I am out of the house or office (where there are actual land-line phones), I do not want my private space invaded. Call me old-fashioned, but I still believe that being “out” means that I can not be reached while socializing, eating or on the toilet. So, for me, the argument against towers no doubt is predominantly at the vanguard of people who actually own cell phones and so it is not unlike those who complain about the price of gas but use their cars when they can use public transport. Yes, I understand that cars, like cell phones, are necessary evils but we have to understand that we are the ultimate addicts of technology and so must pay the piper, sowing the bad with the good.

The kicker is that Health Canada officials whose jobs are to ensure the safety of all fellow citizens - while conducting in-depth tax-paid clinical studies in hot beds of cell use like Barbados, Hawaii and Bali - have determined that cell phones are more dangerous than actual proximity to low emitting base station towers.

So while you fight to distance yourself from these supposed tall-boy flingers of microwaves, you think nothing of sticking a hot wire in your ear. We want our toys but we don’t want to share the consequences.

Having said that, I am all for keeping the towers away from our doorsteps and putting them where they belong:

On top of forgotten Hydro transmission towers which are already in place and slowly sterilizing every living thing down to gnats in the immediate vicinity.

Cellphone tower angers neighbours

By Sandra Bolan|

http://www.yorkregion.com

• 
  
• 
  
• Mar 11, 2011 - 11:10 AM

Rural residents concerned with health, house prices

No cell towers needed. A Canadian flag flies from a cellphone tower at the of Yonge Street and Elgin Mills Road in this file photograph. Despite Rogers officials telling Stouffville council a new tower is needed near Warden Avenue and St. John Sideroad, residents want nothing to do with it. File Photo/Steve Somerville

Rogers Communications claims wireless coverage is significantly deficient in the Whitchurch-Stouffville area and customers are constantly dealing with dropped calls.
Area residents say their service is just fine and they don’t want Rogers to erect a new tower in the Warden Avenue and St. John’s Sideroad area.

Rogers wants to install a 50-metre high, self supporting tower at 3151 St. John’s Sideroad that would provide a high quality wireless signal for its high-speed voice and data network.

“We think this proposal will meet our objectives of providing customers in this area with voice and data,” Tatyana Moro, municipal relations co-ordinator for Rogers Communications, told Whitchurch-Stouffville council Tuesday.

“I would much rather see a landfill site or dump at that site. That way I would get fair market value for my home,” said Grant Purdy, who lives near the tower’s proposed location.

Mr. Purdy, along with a handful of other residents who also live near the proposed site, lobbied council to stop the tower from going up.
“I feel this whole process is being railroaded with the residents on St. John’s Sideroad,” said Chris Kuettel.

“We’re not railroading anything through,” replied Mayor Wayne Emmerson.

The mayor did note, however, the town’s hands are tied.

Wireless communication installations are exclusively regulated by the federal government. Although municipal permits to erect the tower are not required, Rogers must still “participate in meaningful consultation with the municipalities” and adhere to their protocols.

For Whitchurch-Stouffville, that means the applicant must consult with surrounding landowners and public agencies.
Rogers hosted a public meeting at the Ballantrae Community Centre March 2. Many of the residents who attended that meeting, also came to Tuesday night’s council meeting.

“I hear there’s nothing we can do about it and that concerns me,” Mr. Kuettel said.

Although council listened to the residents’ concerns, Mr. Emmerson noted it was imperative they also contact the area’s MP, Paul Calandra.

Along with the unsightliness of the proposed tower, residents were concerned about a decline in property value and potential health risks.

“I really don’t want to find out 20 years from now my (10-month-old) son has something because of this tower,” said Ashley Wright, who noted a friend in their 50s, who grew up near a hydro tower, has battled cancer twice.

According to Rogers, there is no direct scientific link between the effects of radio frequencies from wireless communication installations and it is following Health Canada guidelines.

“I don’t take great comfort in the minimum standards of Health Canada,” said Larry Douglas.
Residents also questioned the company’s site selection process.

According to Rogers, six potential candidates were approached when the proposal was initiated in February 2009.
“The subject property, which was selected, is well suited for the proposed structure as it has a commercial setting (landscaping business) on the property,” according to a report from Rogers.

After listening to the residents, Mr. Emmerson admitted he too has some reservations about the tower’s proposed location.
A report by staff is expected to come back to council.

“I think council is going to have to take a real good look at this with our staff,” Mr. Emmerson said. “Council will take a position.”
“I think Rogers needs to take a tally of how many customers they may lose with this tower,” Mr. Emmerson said.

Study to look into hazards of cellphone

Rhythma Kaul, Hindustan Times

New Delhi, March 10, 2011

How does electromagnetic radiation emitted from cellphones and cellular towers affect Indians? To get the exact data on Indians, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) is doing a Rs 1-crore study, involving 5,000 people over five years in Delhi. “The long-term impact of radiofrequency radiati

ons can vary due to physical and environmental factors, such as bone mass density, muscle mass, climatic conditions, wind velocity etc,” said Dr RS Sharma, deputy director general, division of reproductive health and nutrition, ICMR.

“So far, we use global data but there is need for a study to assess the health impact on Indians,” said Sharma, who was part of an eight-member inter-ministerial panel that submitted its report on the impact of these radiations last month.

The study, which will be conducted at New Delhi’s All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), will collect data to formulate safety guidelines for India. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines are currently being used as a safety benchmark.

As many as six departments from AIIMS will be involved in the study that will check the neurological, gynaecological and reproductive, cardiovascular, ear, nose and throat, blood system and cancerous effects of radiation on the human body.

People between 18 and 45 years of age will be divided into five groups — heavy users, who use mobile for more than four hours in a day; moderate users using it between two and four hours; low users, for less than two hours, non-users and controlled users, or people who have had no contact with radiations. “We would need Delhiites who never used cellphones or cordless phones and don’t live near cellphone towers,” said Dr Rakesh Kumar, associate professor, department of ENT, AIIMS, who is a part of the study team. Some studies have linked continuous radiation exposure to fatigue, sleep disturbance, dizziness, lack of concentration etc.

200非法電訊塔還在 輻射公害防護聯盟不滿

摘自中国报

March 9, 2011 23:32

（檳城9日訊）檳州政府自去年12月31日漂白期后，仍未對州內約200個非法電訊塔採取行動，檳州電磁輻射公害防護聯盟坦言感覺受騙。

該聯盟義務秘書王美麗說，雖然州政府在去年12月主辦的一項論壇上，接納他們提出的預警原則，但在電訊塔申請合法化的期限后，當局仍未採取行動。

被造謠指反政府

“我們不知道州政府是否積極兌現承諾，在沉寂3個月后，的確有受騙的感覺。”

王美麗今早聯袂該聯盟主席李斯杰、顧問溫秀枝及涂仲儀召開記者會時指出，很多時候居民發表心聲，擔憂鄰近的非法電訊塔影響健康后，政府雖然承諾跟進，但未有真正行動。

“就如商務小學對面的非法電訊塔，至今日還沒有被拆除。”

她說，當州政府採納聯盟提出的預警原則時，他們有感受到政府的誠意。只是，州政府到現在還沒有行動。

她解釋，預警原則指的是，當政府不能100%證實一項事物的安全性時，應接受科學家的建議，避免民眾的健康受影響。

“夠了，3年了，我們並不是要反政府，而是要民眾了解有關電磁輻射的訊息，但卻受到迫害，有心人散播謠言指我們反政府。”

她說，他們去年加入國際電磁波輻射聯盟，該聯盟的顧問都是國際有名的科學家，定期研究及發表有關電磁輻射的事項。

她希望，州政府在落實任何有關無線上網的課題前，一定要考慮到電磁輻射的因素。

另一方面，涂仲儀說，在世界約660億總人口中，約3%至5%（60億至70億）人，是電磁波輻射敏感群體。

“200電訊設施仍非法原地豎立”‧防電磁輻射聯盟：檳政府騙人

• 北馬

2011-03-10 16:41

• 

  檳州電磁輻射公害防護聯盟新聞發佈會：左起為李斯傑、涂仲儀、王美麗，和溫秀枝。（圖：星洲日報）

（檳城）檳州電磁輻射公害防護聯盟同人有被州政府欺騙的感覺，因此，在沈寂了3個月之後，還是要出來講話。

接二連三展延的檳州非法電訊塔和電訊發射站漂白期限於去年12月杪到期，至今仍沒有下文，檳州逾兩百個電訊設施仍在原地非法豎立。

該聯盟主席李斯傑、秘書王美麗、顧問溫秀枝和涂仲儀週三（3月9日）上午召開新聞發佈會，要求檳州政府和中央政府照顧全馬人民的健康，妥善的處理電滋輻射公害的問題。

全馬70萬人屬電磁輻射敏感群

他們說，根據專家的報告，世界上3%至5%的人屬於電磁輻射敏感群，如果以3%計算，全馬共有70萬人屬於電磁輻射敏感群，當局應該照顧這些人的福利。

他們說，當初他們為了保護本身的權益奔走時，曾經被州政府人士標籤為反政府，過後州政府態度變得開明瞭，肯聆聽他們的心聲，並於去年12月在一項研討會上表示願意接納他們所要求的預警原則，以便能夠防範於未然。

可是，到了離開最後一個非法電訊設施漂白期限3個月的今天，尚未見到當局有任何實際行動，以致他們有受騙的感覺。

他們說，他們並非要當局禁止所有電訊設施，而是要當局在電訊設施、寬頻和無線上網方面，考慮到人民在健康方面的切身問題。

星洲日報／大北馬‧2011.03.09

Students protest against cellphone tower in IIT-B

Sun Mar 06 2011http://www.indianexpress.com

A cellphone tower set up recently at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Bombay, has become a bone of contention between students and institute authorities. Several students are against the tower, installed around two months ago on top of the C-wing of Hostel 14, and want it removed as they fear the radiation will have an adverse effect on them.

“We are worried about the harmful impact of radiation on our health. We want it removed,” a student said on condition of anonymity. “The consent or opinion of all students was not taken before signing the contract for installing the tower,” another student alleged. Around 400 students were part of a signature campaign against the tower. “The opinion of some students was sought, but everyone was against it.”

Ironically, it was an IIT-Bombay professor — Girish Kumar of the electrical engineering department — who had submitted a 30-page report on “cell tower radiation” to the Department of Telecommunications in December 2010. “In India, we have adopted very relaxed radiation norms of 4.7 W/m2 (watt per metre square) for GSM 900, whereas serious health effects have been noted at as low as 0.0001 W/m2. It’s not just human beings, cell tower radiation can also adversely effects birds, animals and environment. Though cell operators continue to claim that there are no health issues, it’s time we realised the seriousness of the health hazards due to radiation from cell towers,” the report says.

The students had met institute authorities, seeking appropriate steps.