News for United Kingdom

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 227   Next›  Last» 

Huawei to be removed from UK 5G networks by 2027
United Kingdom Created: 19 Jul 2020
"Protecting the UK’s telecoms sector has always been the government’s top priority".

Decision follows a technical review by the National Cyber Security Centre in response to US sanctions.

HUAWEI will be completely removed from the UK’s 5G networks by the end of 2027, the government has announced, following new advice produced by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) on the impact of US sanctions against the telecommunications vendor.

Ahead of this there will be a total ban on the purchase of any new 5G kit after 31 December 2020.

The decision was taken today in a meeting of the National Security Council (NSC) chaired by the Prime Minister, in response to new US sanctions. These were imposed on Huawei in May, after the UK’s initial decision on high risk vendors, and are the first of their kind removing the firm’s access to products which have been built based on US semiconductor technology.

Technical experts at the NCSC reviewed the consequences of the sanctions and concluded the company will need to do a major reconfiguration of its supply chain as it will no longer have access to the technology on which it currently relies and there are no alternatives which we have sufficient confidence in. They found the new restrictions make it impossible to continue to guarantee the security of Huawei equipment in the future.

As a result, ministers today agreed that UK operators should stop the purchase of Huawei equipment affected by the sanctions. There will be a ban on the purchase of new Huawei kit for 5G from next year and it will be completely removed from 5G networks by the end of 2027.

The decision takes into account our specific national circumstances and how the risks from these sanctions are manifested in the UK.

The existing restrictions on Huawei in sensitive and critical parts of the network remain in place.

The US action also affects Huawei products used in the UK’s full fibre broadband networks. However, the UK has managed Huawei’s presence in the UK’s fixed access networks since 2005 and we also need to avoid a situation where broadband operators are reliant on a single supplier for their equipment. As a result, following security advice from our world leading experts, we are advising full fibre operators to transition away from purchasing new Huawei equipment. A technical consultation will determine the transition timetable, but we expect this period to last no longer than two years.

This approach strikes the right balance by recognising full fibre’s established presence and supporting the connections that the public relies on, while fully addressing the security concerns of our world leading experts.

Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden said:

5G will be transformative for our country, but only if we have confidence in the security and resilience of the infrastructure it is built upon.

Following US sanctions against Huawei and updated technical advice from our cyber experts, the government has decided it is necessary to ban Huawei from our 5G networks.

No new kit is to be added from January 2021, and UK 5G networks will be Huawei free by the end of 2027. This decisive move provides the industry with the clarity and certainty it needs to get on with delivering 5G across the UK.

By the time of the next election we will have implemented in law an irreversible path for the complete removal of Huawei equipment from our 5G networks.

The government will now seek to legislate at the earliest opportunity with a new Telecoms Security Bill to put in place the powers necessary to implement this tough new telecoms security framework.

It will give the government the national security powers to impose these new controls on high risk vendors and create extensive security duties on network operators to drive up standards.

FURTHER BACKGROUND

Protecting the UK’s telecoms sector has always been the government’s top priority and last July, through the Telecoms Security Review, it announced one of the toughest regimes in the world for telecoms security. It will require all operators to raise security standards, to combat the range of threats, whether from cyber criminals or state sponsored attacks.

In January, as it concluded The Review, the government concluded ‘high risk’ vendors should be excluded from the core and most sensitive parts of the UK’s 5G network, restricted to up to a 35 per cent market share in the access network, which connects devices and equipment to mobile phone masts, by 2023, with the decisions kept under review. Our word-leading cyber security experts were satisfied that with our approach and tough regulatory regime, any risk can be safely managed, but were also clear that further sanctions could require them to change that assessment.

The policy in relation to high risk vendors has not been designed around one company, one country or one threat. It is intended to be an enduring and flexible policy that will enable us to manage the risks to the network both now and in the future.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: GOV.UK, Press release, 14 Jul 2020

New 20m Three 5G mast cannot be built on grassy land as planned, Bolton Council rules
United Kingdom Created: 5 Jun 2020
A NEW 5G mast would be a “wholly incongruous” and “dominant” feature in the neighbourhood, planners have ruled as an application for a 20-metre phone mast in Great Lever has been thrown out by the local authority.

Planning permission for a telecommunications monopole on the grassy land in Green Lane, known locally as “bus island”, has been refused by Bolton Council.

Mobile network operator Hutchinson 3G UK, commonly known as Three, is in the process of selecting sites for new phone masts in the Bolton area and has submitted a series of applications for different locations across the borough.

But planning officers ruled that this 20-metre mast and base cabinet would appear as a “wholly incongruous” and “dominant” feature that would be harmful to the residential setting and out of scale with its surroundings.

Speaking in April, Andy Brabin, who lives nearby described the proposed mast, which would be twice the height of adjacent properties, as a “visual intrusion”.

As a boy, the Boscobel Road resident used to sell copies of the Bolton Evening News from the selected spot in Green Lane which used to be a bus terminus.

Mr Brabin has now welcomed the “sensible” decision by Bolton Council to refuse planning permission for prior approval of the mast.

He said: “This mast would have been totally out of place and have a negative impact on the amenity of the area.

“I recognise that these masts are needed but to place it in such a prominent position in the heart of a residential area is not appropriate.”

Applications for 20-metre telecommunication monopoles have been submitted to Bolton Council for sites in Chorley New Road near a Texaco garage in Horwich and in Deane Church Lane, next to ASDA in Daubhill.

WHP Telecoms Ltd has also written to councillors in Kearsley on behalf of Three inviting them to enter discussions before it submits plans for a mast in front of Kearsley Mount Shopping Precinct in Manchester Road.

Planning consultant Damian Hosker, submitted the application for the mast in Green Lane, Great Lever to Bolton Council on behalf of Three on April 1.

In a letter to the local authority, he said: “The location has been identified as being necessary for H3G Ltd business development and meets its specific technical and operational requirements.

“The identification of this location follows pre-application discussion with your department and we now make a formal application to you as planning authority.”

The applicant has six months to appeal the decision by Bolton Council.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Bolton News, Joseph Timan, 30 May 2020

Three 5G mast rejected as council says plans would harm regeneration
United Kingdom Created: 5 Jun 2020
Plans for a 20 metre tall 5G mast in Merseyside have been rejected over fears it would harm a local regeneration effort.

The mast, which would have been built just off Conway Street in Birkenhead, Wirral, was said to be "unsightly" and "detrimental" to the character of the local area due to its scale by Wirral Council.

The local authority was also concerned the mast would harm huge plans to regenerate Birkenhead, due to its size and “prominent location” within the regeneration site.

5G has been a controversial topic of late, with campaigners who oppose the technology promoting conspiracy theories linking it to coronavirus without any evidence.

Earlier this week a 5G mast in Mossley Hill, Liverpool, was destroyed in a fire and a video showing another 5G mast on fire in the city was shared on social media last month. Plans for a 20 metre tall 5G mast in Merseyside have been rejected over fears it would harm a local regeneration effort.

The mast, which would have been built just off Conway Street in Birkenhead, Wirral, was said to be "unsightly" and "detrimental" to the character of the local area due to its scale by Wirral Council.

The local authority was also concerned the mast would harm huge plans to regenerate Birkenhead, due to its size and “prominent location” within the regeneration site.

5G has been a controversial topic of late, with campaigners who oppose the technology promoting conspiracy theories linking it to coronavirus without any evidence.

Earlier this week a 5G mast in Mossley Hill, Liverpool, was destroyed in a fire and a video showing another 5G mast on fire in the city was shared on social media last month.

Shortly before that incident, Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson blasted 5G conspiracy theories as “bizarre” and added: "How can anyone contemplate relating putting a 5G mast up in Liverpool causes coronavirus?

“The very idea that Covid-19 was created by 5G is patently nonsense.”

Scientists and other officials, including the World Health Organisation have debunked the 5G Covid-19 theory, stating it is not possible for the virus to be transmitted by electomagnetic radiation.

Three, the company behind this plan, said the new mast in Birkenhead was needed to deliver an “essential” improvement in 5G connectivity in the area.

Explaining the choice of location, Three’s planning documents stated: “Mobile phone base stations operate on a low power and accordingly base stations therefore need to be located in the areas they are required to serve.

“Increasingly, people are also using their mobiles in their homes and this means we need to position base stations in, or close to, residential areas.”

The document also stated that while the planned height of the mast was 20 metres, this has been “kept down to the absolute minimum capable of providing the required essential new 5G coverage”.

It was not possible to simply upgrade an existing mast site to accommodate the 5G mast, because higher radio frequencies used for 5G do not travel as far as those frequencies currently in use and sometimes existing sites do not have the capacity to be upgraded.

To deliver the higher frequency Three said there was an “acute need” for a new mast.

The proposal was rejected for reasons of appearance.

On this, Three’s document said: “The proposed works on this existing site would qualify as a visual change to the area, but are necessary to ensure improved delivery of service [and] would respect and continue to maintain the appearance of the area.”

Three insisted that the plan “would not result in demonstrable harm to the character of the immediate or wider area”.

But Wirral Council disagreed.

The local authority’s letter of rejection, read: “The proposed mast and associated equipment will appear as unsightly features in a prominent location and would therefore, by reason of its scale and siting, have a detrimental and adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area.”

The plan’s potential impact on efforts to regenerate Birkenhead was also given as a reason for rejection by the council.

Wirral Council’s letter added: “The proposed mast would be an unsightly feature within an extremely prominent location at the heart of the Birkenhead Town Centre regeneration site, and this would undermine the significantly advanced regeneration plans for this area.”

A spokesperson for Three said: “ 5G rollout is vital for residents and business of Wirral. We want to offer the local area a great network experience and our planners determined that a new site was required to deliver it. We will work with the council to find a way forwards.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Liverpool Echo, George Morgan, 29 May 2020

URGENT: 5G Judicial Review 2020 - 15 days to reach £50,000 (£38,514 pledged already).
United Kingdom Created: 20 May 2020
I am a solicitor - I became involved in understanding the harmful health impact of 5G when a member of my community alerted me to an application to put a mast on the building opposite her apartment.

This page is against wireless 5G, radiofrequency radiation (“RFR”) and electromagnetic fields (“EMFs”) generally due to their impact on the health of humans, animals and plants.

Many people are sensitive to RFR and EMFs and suffer illness, distress and financial loss due to inability to work. The balance of scientific evidence is now clear that RFR/EMFs are harmful to humans.

The UK government insist on using ICNIRP’s guidelines to set limits of radiation for public health. ICNIRP’s guidelines are not fit for purpose as, among other things, they only recognise harm from heating of the body and are set for short term exposure – 6 minutes in fact. Many people suffer harm without any heating of their bodies.

5G is the fifth generation of RFR technology used in the mobile telecoms industry and follows 1G – 4G. It dwarfs RFR from 1G – 4G because millions more masts, antennae, small cells, picocells etc have to be placed at short distances apart all around the country in order to develop the infrastructure to deliver the data speed promised by 5G.

The current electrosmog from 1G – 4G will become significantly worse and it is likely to result in more harm to humans, animals, trees and pollinators.

Many people have tried to engage with the government and its agencies, including Public Health England, over the last few years in an attempt to persuade them that their existing policies are harmful to human, animal and plant health. The government rejects such approaches and insists on its adherence to ICNIRP’s guidelines. It has removed health concerns from the National Planning Policy Framework, thereby removing the ability of its citizens from raising such concerns at local council level. Its Electronic Communications Code has limited the rights of its citizens to object to equipment being put on their land. It has permitted the proliferation of RFR gadgets used by babies and children without constraint.

*SNIP* read the complete text at the source link below...

Click here to view the source article.
Source: CrowdJustice, Jessica Learmond-Criqui, 17 May 2020

UK Legal action against 5G
United Kingdom Created: 10 May 2020
We are groups of individuals nationwide, including doctors, scientists and engineers, supported by a strong team of lawyers headed by Michael Mansfield QC, who have joined forces to commence legal proceedings to challenge the UK government’s failure to take sufficient notice of clearly identified health and safety risks of wireless radiation and the increased exposure from the deployment of 5G.

The risks are foreseeable and preventable, current standards are not fit for purpose and obsolete. The case concerns defending our fundamental right to privacy and protection from experimentation.

*SNIP* Visit the website, here: https://actionagainst5g.org/
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Action Against 5G, 10 May 2020

If all roofs were developed as ‘green’ what would happen with the phone masts?
United Kingdom Created: 9 May 2020
I WRITE in support of the tenants and residents of Haddo House, who are currently living with the threat of having mobile phone masts placed on the roof of their Camden Council owned block.

In several similar cases, namely Chester Court, Lissenden Gardens, Winifred Paul House and Monmouth House, such plans were ditched after meeting very strong opposition.

In the case of Monmouth, the mobile phone masts that were planned for our roof eventually appeared on the roof of a commercial premises just past the main entrance to Regis Road industrial estate on a building that has the words Kentish Town written on its side in large graffiti.

If you took mobile phone mast law at face value, it would tell you that the mobile phone firms can choose to put their masts on any roof, whether the property owner likes it or not, unless the owner has the intention to develop their roof.

I still maintain Camden could end all threat of mobile phone masts being placed on its residential buildings by proving that its green credentials are more than just talk through implementing a programme of developing all its roofs as green roofs.

That said, if the opposition is strong enough, these firms will find an alternative site on a non-residential building.

I would urge any TRA that is under threat from having such masts placed on their roofs to read the many letters written by myself and others on this whole subject in recent months in the CNJ Letters section.

The dates and letters are as follows: in 2019 (Act now on mobile phone masts, May 2), (Are we living amid danger that we don’t understand? May 9), (New dangers with the roll-out of 5G, May 16) and (concerned), (Why the silence on mobile phone masts? May 30), (Waves are worrying, June 6), (Phone masts questions, July 4), (Stop these phone masts, July 11), (Signals safety first, please, August 1), (Danger signals for the 5G roll-out, August 8), (Scrap digital rooftops programme, September 19), (Scrap the 5G programme, October 10), (5G safety is not assured, October 31), and, on January 9 2020, Never mind phone masts, let’s green our rooftops.

LOUIS LOIZOU
Raglan Street, NW5
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Camden New Journal, LOUIS LOIZOU, 08 May 2020

Glastonbury calls for 5G inquiry
United Kingdom Created: 30 Apr 2020
Following six months of investigation, Glastonbury Town Council has resolved unanimously to adopt the recommendations of their ‘5G Advisory Committee’, which was set up in 2019 to explore the safety of 5G technology.

The recommendations include:

writing to MPs asking them to establish an inquiry into the safety of 5G;
calling for the UK Government and Public Health England to undertake an independent scientific study into:
The non-thermal effects of 5G, and
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity;
and lobbying the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) to take into account the non-thermal effects of radiofrequency EMFs in their Guidelines on Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields.
In addition to the recommendations, Glastonbury Town Council resolved unanimously to continue their adoption of the Precautionary Principle; opposing the roll-out of 5G until further information is made available on the safety or otherwise of the technology.

“The Town Council is greatly indebted to the members of the 5G Advisory Committee, who have met regularly; collected and studied a large volume of literature – and received presentations from a number of academics and professionals, including the Director of Mobile UK, the organisation overseeing the roll-out of 5G in the UK.

As chair of the advisory committee, I have been impressed by the number of councils and local authorities who have been in contact; requesting copies of the committee’s report and recommendations… However, I must stress that a Town Council, such as Glastonbury, has absolutely no power to stop the roll-out of 5G, which is why it is so important to bring our report to the attention of MPs, the Government, Public Health England, and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.”

Cllr. Jon Cousins, Deputy Mayor of Glastonbury, and Chair of the 5G Advisory Committee.

*** See source link below for full report ***
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Glastonbury Town Council, 29 Apr 2020

Petition: Delay 5G in the UK until there’s been an independent investigation
United Kingdom Created: 28 Apr 2020
I would like to see a full independent investigation and report to declare the findings on the 5G network in relation to radio activity and the health implications.

The inquiry should be undertaken by independent medical institutions that are not linked in any way to the telecoms industry, to ensure they are impartial to the findings of health in relation to 5G.

As a member of the public, I demand to know the truth in regards how safe 5G is.

Sign the petition here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/312997
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Petition Parliament, Claudia Pinto, 20 Apr 2020

Is 5G really worth developing?
United Kingdom Created: 23 Mar 2020
Is developing a 5G network viable in a world reeling from the effects of coronavirus?.

The massive investment required to get 5G up and running is making a lot of people look closely at their budgets and the value of the technology, says Dr Ramsey Faragher, founder and CEO of Cambridge-based Focal Point Positioning.

The weight of 5G technology being added to masts is the first challenge, says the GPS expert, whose ‘supercorrelation’ technology dramatically improves GPS accuracy.

“The physical infrastructure in the ground will need to be changed if the masts are not strong enough to hold the 5G structures,” Dr Faragher notes. “5G can use five times the amount of power consumption than is used currently and is much heavier - not all existing masts can support those changes.”

The uncertainty comes as the first UK mobile operator switches on its 5G service, and 5G gaming platforms start up in the US. The main 5G markets are in Japan, South Korea and the US. But the technology is hugely controversial, with concerns about the increased exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on one side set against those who say the risks are negligible. In the middle are those who suggest we have no reason to believe the technology is safe.

Another view is that 5G simply isn’t necessary. Dr Faragher says the William Webb book, The 5G Myth, “has been saying 5G isn’t needed basically”. Prof Webb’s argument is that 4G still hasn’t been fully utilised and should be before the costs of 5G become justifiable. Dr Faragher says improving efficiency is the solution.

“We’re trying to get to the bottom of how useful we can be for 5G,” he says. “The massive MIMO involved is very expensive.”

Multiple Input/Multiple Output - “MIMO” - refers to the use of multiple transmitters and receivers (multiple antennas) on wireless devices for improved performance.

“The equipment required to the masts is very heavy and uses a lot of power so the network operators are looking to lower costs and there is another method.

“Electronics beam steering is where the handset tells the mast where it is. The mast points a narrow beam to the phone and keeps it in use as you move. This method is cheaper in power terms and in the size of the masts required, as well as the amount of data processing required - but the device needs to be very accurate to tell the mast your location but this would involve lower costs and higher efficiency. We’re chipping away at this: speaking to people involved in the technology is important at this time.

“Traditional 4G sectoring uses three 120-degree beams to cover all of he directions around the mast.” In order to give you much higher bandwidths 5G “dedicates more of the frequency to you by only using a very narrow 20-degree beam - rather than 120 - and as you move around this beam needs to be steered to keep pointing at you. One way to enable this is for the phone to keep telling the mast exactly where it is - indoors or outside. So accurate positioning is very important.”

Focal Point Positioning was started in 2015 and has since successfully built two products based on supercorrelation: S-GPS and D-Tail. Both involve proprietary software-based improvements to existing technology by using GPS. S-GPS puts new software inside the GPS chip itself, and D-Tail provides its improvements outside the GPS chip, by combining data from other sensors with advanced models of movement. Thecompany employs 28 people.

“We’ve been working very hard for five years filing the patents and building the software, and now it’s coming to fruition,” says Dr Faragher, whose company has been funded by venture capital thus far, with revenues from D-Tail and S-GPS commencing this year.

The company is “in the middle of negotiating a licensing deal with a major smartphone company, and has signed a deal with a major chip maker” which will include supercorrelation features in 2021 smartphones, thereby ensuring that those nagging issues of not being able to use your smartphone in busy areas or shops will soon be permanently eradicated.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Cambridge Independent, Mike Scialom, 23 Mar 2020

Bromsgrove campaigner's concerns over safety of 5G networks
United Kingdom Created: 28 Feb 2020
A CAMPAIGNER has expressed concerns about the health implications of the UK’s 5G network and called for a full debate on its safety.

Phil Haynes, from Bromsgrove, said he felt there should have been proper tests before decisions to create networks were taken.

“Back in the day when a mobile phone mast was put up there were protests about the damage the waves could do and there were restrictions about them being sited by schools – and that was only 3G.

“Next there was 4G and that has not been around long enough to see if there have been any negative effects on people or their health.

“Now these 5G masts are a lot stronger and in order to achieve the coverage these companies need there will have to be transmitters every few hundred feet.

“The first 5G network was only rolled out in South Korea in April last year so that has not even been operating for 12 months.

“How can we know what impact those waves are having on people?”

He said 5G was first invented for the military and the network’s waves were similar to ones used in crowd control.

He added he felt the mobile phone coverage locally and nationally was sufficient for most people.

“Do we really need to download films in five seconds flat?”

He said the 5G network would be used in years to come with driverless cars and other future developments but he questioned whether anymore automation and ‘intrusive’ technology was needed in our everyday lives.

Other people have also expressed concerns on our Facebook page about the need for 5G and the millions of taxpayers’ money being spent on the networks.

John Adkins said: “4G works fine,” while Green Party campaigner Neil Franks added: “Total waste of money by the Government.”

After being notified of £3.3million worth of Government funding, Worcestershire County Council announced last week a West Mercia Rural Project would begin in April to look at the ‘positive effects’ of 5G.

In response to Mr Haynes’ claims, Simon Mann, Public Health England’s (PHE) head of radiation dosimetry, said: “It is possible there may be a small increase in overall exposure to radio waves when 5G is added to an existing telecommunications network or in a new area – however, the overall exposure is expected to remain low relative to guidelines and as such there should be no consequences for public health.”

PHE said exposure to 5G radio waves should comply with the International Committee on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines, adding it was committed to keeping its advice under review and updating it should new evidence dictate it necessary.

There had been a general trend towards increasing numbers of smaller transmitters, since telecommunications networks were introduced.

Measurements taken currently show the general public’s exposure to radio waves was well within ICNIRP guidelines and these same standards would be applied to 5G networks with operators already committed to the guidelines.

Mr Haynes urged anyone wanting to be part of a 5G debate to email him at phil@philhaynes.co.uk to express their interest.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Bromsgrove Standard, Tristan Harris, 28 Feb 2020

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 227   Next›  Last» 
 News item: