News for United Kingdom

 Page 1 of 227   Next›  Last» 

United Kingdom Created: 23 Apr 2021
Legal Action Against 5G led by Michael Mansfield QC have recently lodged their case against the government.

The Defendants are




The Claimants are represented by Michael Mansfield QC, Philip Rule and Lorna Hackett of Hackett & Dabbs LLP

The case concerns an important issue of public safety. It raises the risk to which members of the public, including particular vulnerable individuals, and children, are being exposed without having consented to or agreed to expose themselves to that risk; and without an adequate and proper consideration undertaken by the relevant safeguarding authorities of the creation of those man-made public health risks.

We provided documents containing evidence from a multitude of respected and eminent experts concerning the health effects of the technology used by 5G, and the attendant risks to the public and individuals, upon which the Defendants declined to act.

The Defendants cannot lawfully continue to ignore or overlook the evidence that indicates the existence of a risk that has not been quantified. To date there has been a failure to engage with this body of evidence, and an inappropriate attempt to delegate any assessment of risk to an external body – a body against which membership legitimate criticism of industry finance and conflict of interest is levelled.

The issues include:

the absence of due investigation of the nature and extent of the risks to the safety of individuals, and human health by the relevant United Kingdom authorities;

the absence of appropriate measures, systems and safeguarding steps to address the identified risks or potential risks; and
a failure to adopt and apply a precautionary principle, or informed foresight, to the exposure of non-consenting children and adults to a risk of harm.

The law provides a framework that demonstrates the unlawfulness of the inaction and errors of the executive bodies we have challenged.
Holding to account the executive or legislative authorities to comply with the law and legal duties is undoubtedly a proper and essential function for the Court, especially in the context of protection of individuals from harm that includes loss of life or serious injury.

The grounds are:

The Defendants are in breach of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 resulting from omissions and failings in violation of the positive obligations required to be met by Articles 2, 3 and/or 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Defendants have failed to consider the best interests of children when considering formulating, updating or reviewing the appropriate approach to 5G policy and risk assessment for exposed children. In the alternative, they have failed to make this a primary consideration.

The Defendants are in breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty (“PSED”) (s149 EA 2010). There has been no equality assessment, within the meaning and terms of the PSED, to properly inform and be considered in decisions as to the risk posed by RFR and affecting for example approval of 5G generally and/or of permissible locations of 5G and/or of the policy to adopt ICNIRP guidelines.

The SSHSC is in breach of his statutory duty under s2A of the National Health Service Act 2006, either resulting from (a) unlawful delegation or abdication of the statutory function to an external private organisation; and/or (b) irrationally failing to take appropriate steps under this power and/or failing to exercise a discretion in accordance with the statutory purpose.

The Defendants have failed to take into account as a relevant consideration, and give due and proper consideration to, all the evidence, information and concerns which we have raised with them.

The Defendants have failed to provide adequate and sufficient reasons for the decision not to establish a process to investigate and establish the adverse health effects and risks of adverse health effects from 5G technology and/or for discounting the risks presented by the evidence available.


The Claimants wish to thank all the many members of the public who have supported them including those that have written messages of encouragement, some of which have been heart wrenching, on the Crowd Justice site; who watch our updates on progress and the thousands who have given donations in support of this legal action. It is for those who have written letters, signed petitions and campaigned, the scientists, doctors and engineers that have put their names to appeals and all the many who have supported our work. It is for those who remain puzzled or uninformed but feel unwell or develop any of the many symptoms that are associated with or worsened by radiation. And it is for our shared environment that does not have a say but for which we, as responsible citizens, are custodians.

Meanwhile our work continues in earnest, and we wish to thank all of you for your continuing support. We will issue further information as this matter progresses.

Further information can be found at and please continue to support our legal team at

Donations by post will be gratefully received and can be sent to PO Box 13199, SW6 6ZU.

The account details are: Account name: Ms Victoria Angell Sort code: 30-94-81 Account No: 28059168
The above account is used purely in connection with the LAA5G campaign, to facilitate donations by BACS and cheque.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Action Against 5G, via email, 22 Apr 2021

URGENT: Needing A Place To Be ( Roger Moller )
United Kingdom Created: 18 Feb 2021
In 2008 when neighbours refused to turn off their new wireless router I fled for my life with what I could carry. I was homeless for 3 months though I eventually found safe haven in a little valley with no signal in Wales. I have been pleased to accommodate many equally desperate EHS sufferers in the 13 years since. All that time I have been looking for suitable places, not only for myself but for fellow sufferers but have so far been unable to find anywhere available, even temporarily, which I would be able to tolerate.
My life has been threatened for the last 2 years by the prospect of a 4G/ESN mast nearby, I will have to have gone from here before it goes up this year. Most of my things are in storage but in any event my landlady wants her house back and I now find myself in dire need of at least ‘a place to be’.

So it is with great reluctance that I appeal to the ES-UK community in hopes that someone who understands EHS will be willing to offer me safe haven from early March on practically any basis.

Roger Moller - Abergwesyn, Powys 01223 911 893 / (+44) (0) 333 011 5476
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Roger Moller, via ES-UK newsletter, 18 Jan 2021

United Kingdom Created: 29 Jan 2021
Why ‘Smart’ Wireless Means We Are Dying Younger in Poorer Health and Endangering the Wellbeing of Our Children.

The Diary of an Electrosensitive

Brian Stein CBE and Jonathan Mantle

‘We are taking advice from a small, self-appointed circle of insiders who reject all research showing harm, and who set safety limits.’ Brian Stein, UK

‘We are taking risks of the sort that no rational society on earth should take.’ Professor Martin Pall, Washington State University, USA.

‘We should have ethical permission for people who are going to be exposed to 5G. Thirteen persons make decisions for the whole world – as opposed to 250 persons who have signed the independent scientific declaration.’ Professor Lennart Hardell, Sweden.

‘The non-thermal effects on our cells, organs and tissues do damage at energy levels that may be hundreds or thousands of times lower than those that cause significant heating. Our governments and health authorities are doing nothing to protect us.’ Professor Andrew Goldsworthy, UK.

‘The car was not invented to be safe, it was invented to sell. Lots of people died. Only consumer pressure eventually forced car manufacturers to introduce seat belts. It’s the same with mobile phones.’ Dr Andrew Tresidder, UK.

Brian Stein CBE

The Microwave Delusion is the story of how one man’s personal experience of the damaging health effects of low-level microwave radiation became part of an international campaign to hold the mobile phone industry to account for its defective safety practices.

This book charts industry dirty tricks, government indifference and the rise of independent science over industry-controlled studies, leading to campaigns, political action, legal judgements in mainland Europe, North America and Israel and action to protect children in schools: a change of process which many countries are adopting and which British health authorities, politicians and those with a duty of care are the slowest to acknowledge.

The roll out of 5G worldwide presents the greatest threat yet to public health from low-level microwave radiation generated by a mobile phone industry which places profit above the long-term wellbeing of pregnant women, babies, children and adults at home, school, in public and in the workplace. As one leading independent scientist says: ‘We are taking risks of the sort that no rational society on earth should take.’

The Microwave Delusion describes how an industry-driven tragedy in the making has come into being on a scale comparable to tobacco and asbestos, how it can be averted, and what we as individuals and a society can do about it.

*All profits from this book go to charities campaigning for a safer wireless environment around the world.

‘Congratulations On a Very Important Book’
Professor Lennart Hardell, gold standard, independent peer-reviewed scientist.

How to Buy:

‘The Microwave Delusion’ is published by Grosvenor House Publishing and available for sale online and from bookshops including Waterstones, Amazon Book Depository, Barnes and Noble, Foyles and eBay. RRP: £14.99

Author Contacts:

Brian Stein: 01949 20498

Jonathan Mantle:

07833 128174

The Authors:

Brian Stein CBE is a successful retired business leader decorated for his services to education in the community. He is Chairman of the EM-Radiation Research Trust.

Jonathan Mantle’s books are published in 30 countries and 16 languages. He is not as far as he knows electrically sensitive.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMFacts blog, Don Maisch PhD, 28 Jan 2021

Transport bosses decide free wi-fi no longer an option for Metrolink
United Kingdom Created: 25 Jan 2021
Transport bosses confirmed today (Monday) that they have decided to scrap free wi-fi on Metrolink services permanently as a cost-saving option.

Liberal Democrat Councillor Howard Sykes MBE had made objections to the move, when the issue was discussed on Friday (January 22) at a meeting of the Rail and Metrolink Committee of the Transport for Greater Manchester Board.

The meeting was arranged at the request of Councillor Sykes, who sits on the Committee and Board as an Oldham representative.

Councillor Sykes also represents Shaw Ward, which is located on the busiest Metrolink tram service and has the most used stop – Shaw and Crompton – on the Rochdale to Oldham line.

In July 2020, in response to complaints from constituents who use the tram, he raised that the wi-fi service had not been available on trams on the line since the onset of the coronavirus lockdown.

Councillor Sykes wrote to Metrolink bosses asking them to turn it back on.

He was informed that during the travel restrictions which accompanied the lockdown, the service had been switched off and was under long-term ‘review’.

Today’s Committee meeting confirmed the switch off of the wi-fi service permanently citing cost pressures.

Councillor Sykes said: “Unfortunately, no wi-fi on trams and the Manchester city centre free buses is now a reality.

"This done deal was a decision that was only exposed because I raised it, and there are no plans to reintroduce it.

"I think this is short-sighted.

“Like passengers on buses and trains, wi-fi is a service that Metrolink passengers will expect because as passenger usage does start to increase after the pandemic, and as we look to expand the network, there will be an increased demand for free wi-fi from passengers.

"The fact this was done ‘on the quiet’ is typical how the GM Mayor makes such ‘bad news’ decisions.”

Under the wi-fi section of TfGM's Metrolink performance notes, the report read: "Metrolink and Free Bus had been providing free at the point of use wi-fi to passengers since 2015, with the costs of operating the service largely covered by commercial sponsorship from March 2018 to October 2019.

"Whilst there could be potential for a new sponsorship deal to replace the previous arrangement, commercial advice is that this is unlikely, at least in the short-term, as patronage and therefore advertising reach is significantly depressed by the COVID pandemic.

"Usage levels had declined year on year since 2017, in line with the increased availability of cheaper, and in some cases unlimited personal data allowances, with this trend expected to continue in the future.

"Due to the financial challenges faced by TfGM and Metrolink during the pandemic the Wi-Fi service was placed under review.

"Since the switch-off there has been very little customer feedback around the service, and of those received, none of those customers commented further when an explanation was provided."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Oldham Chronicle, 25 Jan 2021

Electromagnetic fields, 5G and health: what about the precautionary principle?
United Kingdom Created: 19 Jan 2021
Abstract: New fifth generation (5G) telecommunications systems, now being rolled out globally, have become the subject of a fierce controversy.

Some health protection agencies and their scientific advisory committees have concluded that there is no conclusive scientific evidence of harm. Several recent reviews by independent scientists, however, suggest that there is significant uncertainty on this question, with rapidly emerging evidence of potentially harmful biological effects from radio frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposures, at the levels 5G roll-out will entail.

This essay identifies four relevant sources of scientific uncertainty and concern: (1) lack of clarity about precisely what technology is included in 5G; (2) a rapidly accumulating body of laboratory studies documenting disruptive in vitro and in vivo effects of RF-EMFs—but one with many gaps in it; (3) an almost total lack (as yet) of high-quality epidemiological studies of adverse human health effects from 5G EMF exposure specifically, but rapidly emerging epidemiological evidence of such effects from past generations of RF-EMF exposure; (4) persistent allegations that some national telecommunications regulatory authorities do not base their RF-EMF safety policies on the latest science, related to unmanaged conflicts of interest.

The author, an experienced epidemiologist, concludes that one cannot dismiss the growing health concerns about RF-EMFs, especially in an era when higher population levels of exposure are occurring widely, due to the spatially dense transmitters which 5G systems require. Based on the precautionary principle, the author echoes the calls of others for a moratorium on the further roll-out of 5G systems globally, pending more conclusive research on their safety.

Read the entire article (open access) via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Prof. John William Frank

5G roll-out should stop while ‘suspected adverse health effects’ investigated, expert claims
United Kingdom Created: 19 Jan 2021
The global roll-out of 5G should be halted while further investigations are conducted into potential risks associated with the next-generation network technology, a health expert has warned.

Professor John William Frank from the Usher Institute at the University of Edinburgh claimed that no more transmitter towers should be built in order to limit public exposure while safety standards are reviewed.

In an opinion piece published in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Professor Frank wrote that the radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) emitted by 5G towers could be linked to “suspected adverse health effects”, though he emphasised that there is no scientific evidence linking 5G to the spread of Covid-19, as some conspiracy theorists have claimed.

“A growing number of engineers, scientists, and doctors internationally [are] calling on governments to raise their safety standards for RF-EMFs, commission more and better research, and hold off on further increases in public exposure, pending clearer evidence of safety,” he wrote.

“It is highly likely that each of these many forms of transmission causes somewhat different biological effects – making sound, comprehensive and up-to-date research on those effects virtually impossible.”

The introduction of 5G coverage offer users radically faster download speeds and the ability to conduct lag-free ultra-HD video chats with other users, however only a handful of high-end devices currently offer the service in a limited number of areas.

Its roll-out has been accompanied by baseless conspiracy theories linking it to the coronavirus pandemic, which have been fuelled by online misinformation disseminated across social media platforms.

Facebook groups sharing fake reports about the alleged dangers of 5G reached tens of thousands of users in 2020, prompting the social network to crack down on such content.

Professor Frank dismissed these conspiracy theories in his article, writing: “There are knowledgeable commentators’ reports on the web debunking this theory, and no respectable scientist or publication has backed it… The theory that 5G and related EMFs have contributed to the pandemic is baseless.”

He added that other possible side effects should be looked at more closely, and called for “a moratorium on that exposure, pending adequate scientific investigation."

There have been numerous studies in recent decades that have sought to understand the potential risks associated with mobile phones and electromagnetic radiation from phone towers, though no adverse effects have yet been established.

According to the World Health Organisation’s International Electromagnetic Fields Project, there is yet to be any concrete proof of negative health outcomes from electromagnetic fields.

Click here to view the source article.
Source: Independent, Anthony Cuthbertson, 19 Jan 2021

Fury as huge phone mast is erected without planning permission just a few feet from residents' homes
United Kingdom Created: 1 Dec 2020
Furious residents of two streets in Ashton are demanding answers from Bristol City Council after a massive mobile phone mast tower was put up close to their homes without any warning at all.

Engineers began preparing the ground behind the South Bristol Retail Park last Monday (November 23), and a large crane arrived in the middle of the week.

But it wasn’t until Friday (November 27) that the full height of the phone mast was revealed.

It towers over the back gardens of Smyth Road and Gerald Road in Ashton, with many saying their views have suddenly been ruined.

Now, attention has turned to the city council’s planning enforcement team, because the firm that erected the mast did not even submit a planning application, let alone get permission for the structure.

Many residents said they feared the company behind the structure are using new permitted development rights, although it is not yet clear if the Government have now given mobile phone companies the right to put up tall masts without asking for permission from council planners first.

The area’s two local councillors said they were urgently asking questions of the planners to find out what can be done about the mast, which is in the rear service yard of the B&M Bargains store in the retail park.

The mast is bolted to a concrete base, with concrete blocks positioned, but not touching it on either side.

It does not have any other anchors, nor does it have any signs indicating the owner or company responsible for the mast.

One local resident said she asked the workmen erecting the mast who they were and was told they were working for a company called Waldon Communications, erecting the mast on behalf of mobile phone giant EE.

Local residents and Bristol Live have contacted EE for more information.

People living next to the mast said they can’t fathom how it has been allowed to be erected without anyone informing them.

“A neighbour rang me to tell me there was a huge crane and next thing we knew, they were putting great big concrete slabs in and putting them between B&M and the Scout Hut, and there was nothing we could do,” said Ann Hathway, 83, who has lived in Gerald Road for 41 years.

“It’s diabolical. I didn’t realise it was going to be that high.

“It’s been lovely here. But now that’s there - but have they gone the right way about it, and got permission. We haven’t heard a thing about it,” she added.

The mast is right on the corner of the land used by the retail park, so on the inside corner of the back gardens of two streets.

Round the corner in Smyth Road, Hannah Reeve said she was stunned when she saw it at the end of her garden.

“We noticed the crane and things being lifted up the day before,and I was out all day, so I came in the garden yesterday.

"We’re due to have building work, and the builder said: ‘you know that there’, and I looked around and saw it.”

“The builder said ‘that’s devalued your house by 25 per cent’,” she added.

“We knew absolutely nothing. I’ve not been informed, not even any chat on Facebook, absolutely nothing at all.

“I’m worried about the health concerns about it - it is so close to all our houses.

"I wouldn’t do anything like this myself, but you hear that these masts are targeted by people, so that’s the last thing we want for it to topple onto our houses.

“But I’m more cheesed off with the way it’s been done. To not tell anyone at all that you’re putting such a tall thing at the end of so many people’s gardens is shocking,” she added.

“It’s been OK living here - obviously the football ground has grown in the last few years, but we’ve got used to that, but this is something else. Why didn’t they just put it on the stadium roof?” she added.

The streets concerned are just off Winterstoke Road, a couple of roads down from the South Stand of Ashton Gate.

It’s in Bedminster council ward, where local councillor Mark Bradshaw said he has had lots of people contacting him to ask what is going on.

“As councillors, we are normally sent details and plans about masts - relocated, renewed or brand new - for any comments in advance of installation, but that doesn’t seem to have been the case for this one,” he said.

“I can understand why people are annoyed and anxious, and we’re urgently asking Bristol City Council to clarify what is permitted within legislation and whether the processes have been adhered to,” he added.

His fellow Bedminster councillor Celia Phipps said she had many questions to ask the council and the mobile phone company.

“Why was this site chosen?” she said. “What were the options, and why don’t they need planning permission? I know the providers need height, as they have used the tower block in the past,” she added.

The question of whether EE - if it is their mast - didn’t need planning permission is the subject of controversy.

In July, the Government announced it would relax the laws on phone companies requiring planning permission to erect phone masts in a bid to speed up the process to get better phone coverage across the country.

That followed a year-long consultation, in which 80-90 per cent of those who responded said they were against 5G masts for health reasons.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Bristol Live, Tristan Cork, 30 Nov 2020

Bad vibrations - persuading the courts to recognise new illnesses
United Kingdom Created: 12 Nov 2020
Please meet James - He first started feeling unwell in 1988 when a transmitting mast five metres from his home - which previously had only an aerial at the top as a relay station - had additional capacity added to it that year.

He started to have headaches and migraines which abated within 30 minutes of leaving the house and vicinity of the mast. When several mobile systems were added to the mast, headaches and brain fog were accompanied by burning across his shoulders and back, and a pricking tingling sensation in his body - like being electrocuted.

His symptoms became worse, and his wife also suffered, when Tetra transmitters were added to the mast: stabbing pains in the shoulders, vertigo, blurred vision, pressure band around the head, headaches, cramping of hands, confusion and lack of concentration, disorientation, dizziness, dry cough, hot spots on the spine, to name just a few from a long list.

James had to take action to protect himself and his family - but he soon hit a block when he began challenging the mobile phone companies. Despite being diagnosed by his GP with a form of radiation sickness known as electro-hypersensitivity (EHS), this crippling condition is not recognised in law as a disability, which the mobile phone operators took as carte blanche to ignore his complaint.

This is a classic legal conundrum when new medical conditions emerge as our world changes. How do you go about getting a new (especially controversial) illness recognised in law and therefore protectable under discrimination laws?

This hypersensitivity to the electromagnetic radiation (EMR) given off by masts, antennae and other mobile communication systems affects humans to varying extents, much like an allergy - some people suffer badly and others less so. These kinds of symptoms are experienced severely by at least 800,000 people in the UK and less severely by at least two million people who are exposed to EMR.

Over many years, James wrote to every public authority representative he could think of in the UK and the EU, including the Prime Minister. No one listened and no one helped. Many had no understanding of his condition, not even considering it as "new" - scientists involved said there was no science to support his condition.

So, what can be done?

One route is to issue judicial review proceedings against relevant public authorities for breach of their public sector equality duty (PSED) under the Equality Act 2010. This is what Phillip Watts, a sufferer of EHS, did when he brought a judicial review against the secretaries of state for the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.

He argues that the contravened the PSED when they announced changes to planning permission requirements for the roll-out of 5G masts, antennae and equipment in July 2020. Under them, existing masts can be strengthened without prior approval.

Public authorities have a duty to eliminate differences between disabled persons (within the meaning of the Act) and non-disabled persons. In addition, when making strategic decisions such as deciding priorities and setting objectives, they must consider how their decisions might help to reduce the inequalities associated with socio-economic disadvantage which includes health inequalities.

Is James disabled under the Equality Act? Section 6(1) defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Schedule 1 extends that to impairments which are likely to last for at least 12 months or for the rest of the life of the relevant person. In the case of James, his condition is lifelong.

Government guidance helpfully provides that "the fact that an impairment may have a less substantial effect in certain environments does not necessarily prevent it having an overall substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities".

It lists factors which are reasonable to regard as having a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities as including "difficulty entering or staying in environments that the person perceives as strange or frightening" this would seem to apply to James's home and his neighbourhood.

The PSED was summarised by Lord Boyd in the recent Scottish case of McHattie v South Ayrshire Council [2020] CSOH 4, identifying three important aspects:

- The duty must be fulfilled before the policy in question is enacted;

- The duty must be exercised in substance with "rigour and an open mind"; it is not a matter of "ticking boxes"; and

- The duty is continuing: it does not end with the completion of the EIA and due regard must be had as policy evolves and is implemented.

Lord Boyd noted that the duties under section 149 do not simply concern the prevention of discrimination but also the promotion of policies which help "eliminate differences between the protected group and those who do not share that protection".

He stated that, in particular, any scoping exercise should not be just a "tick-box exercise completed after the decision has been taken".

In Phillip Watts' case, it is ultimately up to the High Court to decide whether his symptoms amount to a disability under the Act and the PSED has been contravened. In relation to new kinds of symptoms, once medical evidence can be produced to confirm the impact of the symptoms, if the substance of the Act can be made out, individuals can be protected by it.

In James's case, it would seem that public authority representatives failed to consider how to eliminate differences between those suffering from EHS and those not. They have ignored him and marginalised the pain and suffering which he and many others experience every day.

The Watts case will shine a light on these practices and hopefully create a pathway to reverse the rejection of the pain and suffering of those who experience EHS.

James is a real case whose identity has been changed.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Litigation Futures, Jessica Learmond-Criqui, 12 Nov 2020

Landmark ruling made on rooftop phone masts in London
United Kingdom Created: 22 Oct 2020
A Tribunal ruling has set an annual payment of £5000 for a rooftop phone mast in London.

The case of CTIL v L&Q, where landowners L&Q were represented by law firm Clarke Willmott LLP will have major implications for future telecoms agreements for rooftop sites.

The Tribunal made it clear that operators should pay for temporarily shifting its equipment to allow landlords to carry out essential repairs. This, in turn, would put the onus squarely on the telecoms operator.

Clark Willmott Partner Kary Withers commented: “This is the first time that market evidence of new code deals has been considered by a Tribunal and that is why a figure of £5,000 p.a as opposed to £1,000 at a previous Tribunal case involving a property in Islington, has been arrived at.

“The Tribunal also concluded that unrestricted sharing is incompatible with ensuring the least possible loss to landowners.”

Martin Rodger QC commented during the trial that “the notion that landowners should pay for lift and shifts is ludicrous, [the parties] are out of their minds if they thought the landowner should pay”.

The Tribunal considered the use of a rooftop through common parts is likely to involve the landowner. They reviewed market evidence and decided that deals that were negotiated before the commencement of the new code and therefore could not be seen as reliable.

The consideration ordered included an allowance for building maintenance and insurance of £1500, an allowance of £1,000 for managing access, and an allowance for the anticipated costs for upgrading and sharing with two other operators.

The Tribunal considered that willing parties negotiating a 10-year arrangement would be more likely to agree to an annual payment rather than a one-off fee.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Mobile News, Saf Malik, 20 Oct 2020

Experts warn of 'mass violation of rights' as contact-tracing data collected in pubs sold on
United Kingdom Created: 15 Oct 2020
Experts have warned of a “mass violation of rights” after customer data collected by pubs and restaurants has reportedly been sold on to third parties.

Contact-tracing data required by the NHS Test and Trace scheme has been harvested by tech companies on behalf of hospitality venues since they reopened in June, according to The Times.

Although the government states that the information can only be kept for 21 days and must not be used “for any purposes other than for NHS Test and Trace”, some firms are reportedly selling it on.

A number of the data collection firms have reportedly created privacy policies which allow them to store users’ data for up to 25 years and share it with third parties.

The practise was described as a “real scandal” by experts shortly after it was revealed as they called on the government to crack down on the companies.

University of Oxford professor Carissa Veliz tweeted: “In case public trust regarding #privacy wasn't low enough...
Read more: Missing 16,000 coronavirus tests glitch 'caused by large Excel spreadsheet file'

“Scandals like these are the product of decades of allowing an unethical business model that depends on the mass violation of rights to thrive unfettered. Haven't we had enough? #PrivacyIsPower”

Lawyer and TedX speaker Dana Denis-Smith tweeted: “Why isn’t this a surprise how many people read T&Cs on apps esp as they rush to eat out?”

Blogger Jennifer Howze said: “This is a real scandal and we should not be forced into sharing our personal data by govt!”

Harriet Sergeant, a researcher at the Centre For Policy Studies, tweeted: “Pubs and restaurants sell on our contact-tracing data under so called ‘privacy policies’. And that’s just what we know about.”

While Gaurav Malhotra, director of software development company Level 5, told The Times: “If you’re suddenly getting loads of texts, your data has probably been sold on from track-and-trace systems.”

So-called “quick response” QR barcodes have reportedly allowed companies to gain access to names, addresses, telephone numbers and email details.

QR codes have been widely adopted by the hospitality, leisure and beauty industries as an alternative to pen-and-paper visitor logs.

Currently the government requires these venues to collect the names and contact details of customers to help with the NHS Test and Trace programme.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Yahoo! News UK, George Martin, 11 Oct 2020

 Page 1 of 227   Next›  Last» 
 News item: