|
20th April, 2004.
Mark Dunn,
Sussex Police Authority,
County Hall,
St. Anne's Crescent,
Lewes,
BN7 1SW
Dear Mr. Dunn,
Re: Tetra Health Issues
I recently had the privilege of chairing a public meeting in Bognor Regis which was intended to inform the public of the purposes, pros and cons of Tetra. The meeting was attended by Josh Berle of O2 Airwave, Dr. Michael Clark of the NRPB, Ross Hollister of Sussex Police, and also members of the public who are opposed to Tetra. Some 170 members of the general public took the trouble to attend, reflecting the level of concern in the town over this issue.
I should say at the outset that nobody at the meeting was in any way opposed to the need for a secure and effective communications system for the Police and other emergency services. This needs no further discussion since there is no question of any difference of opinion on that point.
The meeting itself was triggered by a Tetra mast which had been erected in the centre of the town and which came to public attention through the sudden and unexplained ill-health of a significant number of people living in the vicinity. Questions began to be asked, links established with the sudden onset of unexplained TV interference and it eventually emerged that the mast had been switched on.
At the meeting a letter from Hazel Blears MP, Home Office Minister, to Nick Gibb MP on this subject and dated 5th March 2004 was read out, and I have to tell you that it was considered by the public to be wholly unsatisfactory. The reasons for this will be mainly evident to you from the questions below, but the overriding reason was because it is evident from her remarks that this is an ongoing experiment on the public (and the Police) in order to fully ascertain the system's safety at some point in the future. Nobody has been asked for their permission to be compulsorily subjected to this experiment, or even consulted on the issue, and this is wholly wrong.
There was considerable discussion at the meeting, with input and questions from the public, and Ross Hollister explained the position of the Police in very clear terms. However, it has caused the Civic Society some very considerable concern that the following points emerged and could not be satisfactorily dealt with by Josh Berle, Dr. Michael Clark or, indeed Ross Hollister:
- The question was asked "is Tetra safe?" None of the above members of the panel would confirm that it is safe. This is wholly unsatisfactory when members of the public (and the Police Force) are being compulsorily irradiated with its emissions. The only answers offered on health issues began with such phrases as "there is no evidence that…" which is widely recognised by the public nowadays as a sham and a means of evading the question. Answers indicating that emissions were within official guidelines were not considered acceptable since these guidelines only referred to heating and did not address any of the effects that had been experienced by people within the town.
- None of the above members could explain why people within range of the mast and formerly in normal health suddenly developed nosebleeds, headaches, nausea, ear pressure, sleep deprivation, 'skin burning' sensations and other unexpected symptoms.
- None of the above members could identify any tests that have been carried out to establish whether or not Tetra is responsible for these and other reported effects on susceptible people. Indeed Dr. Clark (NRPB) went so far as to confirm that such testing has not yet been carried out. This is wholly unsatisfactory.
- Ross Hollister could not explain why, in the light of the above, Sussex Police (who have a responsibility towards the well-being of the public) are expensively involving themselves with this untested and possibly damaging system. His only response was to refer to financial and contractual issues, which issues were not considered to be important when people's health is being put at risk.
- Ross Hollister also could not explain in any satisfactory detail why other, potentially safer, systems, such as Tetrapol, could not be considered as an alternative, other than (again) referring to financial and contractual issues.
In the light of the above we are writing to you personally to ask if you are prepared to provide clear, satisfactory and unequivocal answers to the points raised.
However, if you are unable or unwilling to do this we would ask you if your Authority is prepared to consider taking a stand on this issue on behalf of the public, to whom, after all, you are ultimately responsible. This would mean informing O2 Airwave that the Authority cannot involve the Police with a system which compulsorily irradiates the public until its safety has been properly and unequivocably established by full and thorough independent testing to eliminate the many questions that have arisen. In our opinion this would earn the considerable approval of the public, in spite of the financial issues it may raise, and can only be of benefit to Police/Public relations.
We have written a similar letter to the Sussex Police Chief Constable, also Hazel Blears MP, and we will also be communicating our concerns to the Civic Trust with the intention that similar questions will be raised by Civic Societies all over the UK. Meanwhile, we have informed other Police Authority members that we have written this letter to you and we should be grateful if you would circulate a copy of this letter to them for their consideration.
We look forward to receiving your replies to the points raised.
Yours sincerely,
Hugh Coster.
Deputy Chairman.
|
