Send a Letter: Artificial Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) Technologies and Emissions

Artificial Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) Technologies and Emissions

1 Write Your Letter
2 Review and Send
  • This email will be sent to the following people:

    Cr Rick Baberowski <Rick.[email protected]>
    Division 1 <[email protected]>

    Cr Terry Landsberg <[email protected]>\
    Division 2 <[email protected]>

    Cr Peter Cox <[email protected]>
    Division 3 <[email protected]>

    Cr Joe Natoli <[email protected]>
    Division 4 <[email protected]>

    Cr Winston Johnston <[email protected]>
    Division 5 <[email protected]>

    Cr Christian Dickson <[email protected]>
    Division 6 <[email protected]>

    Cr Ted Hungerford <[email protected]>
    Division 7 <[email protected]>

    Cr Jason O'Pray <[email protected]>
    Division 8 <[email protected]>

    Cr Maria Suarez <[email protected]>
    Division 9 <[email protected]>

    Cr David Law <[email protected]>
    Division 10 <[email protected]>


  • ====================================================

    This is the email content that will be sent.

    YOU CAN ADD A PERSONAL MESSAGE AT THE END OF THE LETTER.
    ====================================================

  • To [recipient]

    Re: Artificial Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation (RF-EMR) Technologies and Emissions

    I am writing directly to you as my elected representative to confirm my extreme concern about what appears to be the forced rollout of Telecommunications infrastructure in and around the Sunshine Coast without any obvious community consultation. Even more concerning is my awareness this infrastructure is vast and will be constantly emitting artificial RF-EMR upon my family, my self, my home and our surroundings including our parks, beaches, flora, fauna and natural living environment.

    Perhaps the most worrisome aspect of this situation is the fact that I have not at any moment knowingly given my consent to be subjected to the threat of being harmed by what I understand is a category '2B carcinogen' and is defined as a 'pollutant’ and which according to Lloyds of London who “refuses to cover wireless mobile illnesses directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise” - 22 Oct 2019 is uninsurable.

    It is my understanding that this technology which emits artificial electromagnetic radiation has not been proven safe to the standard of “robust scientific certainty”.

    I hereby call upon you as my elected representative to remember your 'declaration of office' and other mandatory responsibilities, and thereby take all necessary steps to 'faithfully and impartially fulfill the duties of the office, in accordance with the local government principles under the Local Government Act 2009 to the best of ..your...judgment and ability.’

    It is my understanding as my elected representative that you also have certain principles, values and standards to which you are to abide.

    Councillors' principles, values and standards

    The Queensland Government “Code of Conduct for Councillors in Queensland” (revised and approved 7 April 2020), tells us the LGA (Local Government Act) lays out five local government principles with which Councillors must comply while performing their roles as elected representatives.

    These principles are:

    1. Transparent and effective processes and decision-making in the public interest
    2. Sustainable development & management of assets and infrastructure and delivery of effective services.
    3. Democratic representation, social inclusion and meaningful community engagement.
    4. Good governance of, and by, local government
    5. Ethical and legal behaviour of Councillors and local government employees

     

    This Code of Conduct also provides a set of values that describe the types of conduct Councillors should demonstrate to ensure their compliance with the local government principles.

    These values include: ‘committing to exercising proper diligence, care and attention when making decisions in the public interest and to clearly and accurately explain Council’s decisions.’

    May I also remind you that this Code of Conduct sets out the standards of behaviour applying to all Councillors in Queensland. The behavioural standards relate to, and are consistent with, the local government principles and their associated values.

    The standards of behaviour are:

    1. Carry out RESPONSIBILITIES conscientiously & in the best interests of the Council & the community
    2. Treat people in a reasonable, just, RESPECTFUL & non-discriminatory way
    3. Ensure conduct does not reflect adversely on the REPUTATION of Council

     

    As my elected representative, I am expecting you to adhere to the Councillors declaration, principles, values and standards above-mentioned, before making any decisions whatsoever relating to any existing and proposed installation of infrastructure which will emit artificial RF-EMR.
    This extends to my expectation you will act ethically and responsibly from the awareness there is information, including considerable evidence, which has been presented over recent years around the subject of safety. There is a message of grave concern being echoed among many hundreds of experienced and independent scientific, medical and health professionals in Australia and around the world. Large numbers of people from communities here in Australia and around the world are now more informed and thereby expressing their extreme concern about the obvious absence of robust scientific evidence that the emissions from this technology are safe long term for all people including, our flora, fauna and living environment.

    ARPANSA

    A common response by various government organisations is that they refer to the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) for standards on electromagnetic radiation levels and health. ARPANSA however only provides guidelines. ARPANSA does not provide a regulatory framework with enforcement or penalty provisions. Furthermore, ARPANSA does not have authority to provide medical advice as relates to the health of individuals. In fact ARPANSA advises individuals to seek medical advice from one’s own Medical Practitioner regarding the matter of health.

    ARPANSA adds that risks and risk management are the responsibility of industry and other government agencies.

    ARPANSA and ACMA admit
    “The exposure limits in the ARPANSA Standard are only enforceable if they are referenced in other regulatory arrangements.”
    Link: https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files/legacy/pubs/aboutus/collaboration/js_wifi.pdf

    ARPANSA statement (December 2019);
    “How is radiation regulated in Australia? It’s a common question, & unfortunately the answer isn’t as straightforward as it could be. While ARPANSA is responsible for regulating Commonwealth entities that use or produce radiation, the wider regulation of radiation in Australia falls within the remit of state and territory governments, or in the case of telecommunications, with the Australian Communications and Media Authority.“
    Link: https://www.arpansa.gov.au/news/navigating-radiation-regulation

    Also;
    “Regulation of RF (Radiofrequency) exposure is thorough in the area of communications where public exposure occurs, however, only the Commonwealth regulates RF emitting devices at workplaces. This oversight is limited by the specificity of the regulations where the focus is on devices rather than exposure. In this case, there is a clear limitation in being able to address other sources of RF exposure and a risk of regulations becoming outdated based on the technology focus of the oversight. All other jurisdictions (apart from Western Australia) have no specific regulations regarding RF exposure in the workplace.”
    Link: https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files/tr182.pdf

    Also refer to “Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Energy and Health: Research Needs Technical Report 178 - June 2017” in which 13 recommendations were made for ongoing research on millimetre waves, studies on children, electromagnetic hypersensitivity etc.. 
    Link: https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files/tr178.pdf

    Conclusion

    I am aware you have been sent a significant amount of information on the subject of artificial RF-EMR by many concerned voices among our community. I trust you will, as my elected representative charged with the duty of keeping yourself properly informed, appreciate the contribution made by the many concerned members of the community with the intention of assisting you with your education and duty of care.

    With such support being provided to you from the community, it is expected you are in a sufficiently informed position to apply your highest integrity in your elected function and ensure we are each being represented with impeccability in any and all matters as may relate to the installation of any infrastructure which will emit artificial RF-EMR, a process which will occur twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, all year round.
    It is of particular importance to remind you of my genuine concern around the increased influx of the new small cell infrastructure that is proposed to be built close to private homes, public buildings such as libraries and parks, and also near childcare centres, places of worship, community centres, business buildings, street lamps, bus shelters and so on.
    It is known you are aware three (3) separate Australian Councils have recently taken decisive and affirmative action around 'pausing' and applying ‘precautionary’ measures until the matter of scientific uncertainty as relates to health and safety, are properly addressed and resolved with robust scientific evidence and which confirms the emissions are in fact 100% safe long term for all people including the flora, fauna and living environment.

    As my elected representative it is expected you will take all necessary and prudent steps to forthwith;

    "initiate the immediate 'pause' of any further actions and or activities as may relate to any devices and or installation of infrastructure which either emits now or will emit at some future time RF-EMR. Such actions would include initiating an immediate 'pause' and application of a 'precautionary' approach, to enable proper independent investigation to seek clear and certain confirmation from properly qualified independent professionals, the emissions from this technology are and or will be SAFE long term, for ALL people including flora, fauna and the living environment to the standard of “robust scientific certainty”.
    To NOT take such affirmative actions would appear to be reckless and would indicate there exists a blatant disregard for the assurance of certainty around the enduring safety and /or health of members of this community including the flora, fauna and living environment.
    I do not consent to being exposed to the risk of harm and /or threat of harm from emissions of RF-EMR a known 2B carcinogen and pollutant.
    I trust you will recognize the considerable importance of your elected responsibilities in properly addressing this critical matter as a priority.
    Looking forward to receiving your earliest reply.

    Thank you,

    Kind Regards,

Previous