Write to my Council/MP

Please do write to your local Councillors and MPs to let them know of your concerns about 5G (health, surveillance, privacy). They often feel powerless to resist the imposition of this technology from the government. Local democratic powers are being over-ridden, and citizens objections due to the impact on health and environment ignored. However our representatives can in fact lobby to change the narrative and to protect local interests. The more people who become aware of the key issues the better.

Write to your MP and Councillor about this 5G propaganda:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ministers-call-on-councils-to-help-deliver-digital-connectivity-ambitions

5G guide for councillorsDownload

Write to your representatives about challenging new 5G infrastructure:

Please download and print out the Councillor Letter, which has a link to the Appendices online. Add your details where marked in red. For legal reasons you must post the letter, you can also follow up by email with the Letter and Appendices.

Councillor-Letter2021Download
Appendices2021Download
Appendices online listing

You can ask Councillors to support your community in these ways: (from the letter)

  1. Lobby to stop further implementation of new 4G LTE/5G infrastructure until the key hazards and issues are properly resolved
  2. Call for a Moratorium on all new and proposed wireless 5G systems, and smart city WiFi installations in our community
  3. Lobby for an independent new Regulatory Body with the power to limit and police hotspots, and impose greatly reduced exposure levels (which must be justified and then defined using ALARA ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ principles)
  4. Promote the expansion of FTTP (fibre cabling to the premises)

You can find your Councillor/MP on your local District/Council websites, usually under “find my representative”

If your councillor does not reply or engage please make a report here.

Legal submission documents
https://actionagainst5g.org/news/

The “appropriate “ strength of evidence for precautionary action is an Ethical choice, not a Scientific issue.  Who benefits, and who gains, from being wrong in acting, or not acting, early enough to prevent harm?  Short term, specific, economic interests?  Or the longer term health & wellbeing of people and their  environments?

David Gee. Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Towards realism and precaution with EMF?