Subject: (Fist) Re EMF research story is here...... (fwd)
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 052833 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------
......A very thoughtful suggestion.....Worth considering......guru.....
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 14:06:14 +1000
From: Stewart Fist
To: "Roy L. Beavers"
Subject: Re: EMF research story is here......
Roy can I suggest that the best possible way to get some independence from
industry and big-government research is to separate the funding from industry
sources (from their internal revenues) and from government funding via taxation.
I've been lobbying in Australia for some time to have cell-phone health issues
funded by a levy on cell-phone users, and this has now been given some
recognition by the head of the major user-lobby group in Australia ATUG (Aust.
Telecommunications Users Group).
I am now pushing for a $10 per year levy on all handsets to be collected by
the phone companies, and paid via the government to an independent research
committee for distribution to researchers. In rough terms, half of this money
should go to fund the relocation of cellphone towers which are too near
schools, appartments, etc (on a dollar-for-dollar basis with the company that
owns the base station), and the other half to go to independent research and
the creating of substantial research facilities.
Australia has 5 million cell phone users, so with something like the above,
this would give us a $25 million pa research budget, and a similar amount for
tower relocation.
It is a bit of an ambit claim at $10 -- but I can't really imagine cellphone
users objecting to paying this, if it is to provide long-term safety for themselves.
However the key factor in this approach is that we aren't asking a government
to fund from taxation. A levy like this can be introduced, even in a
political climate where the government has promised "No Tax Increases" and
already has heavy demands on existing taxes.
It also means that the funding is not being done by the cellphone industry
itself -- and they therefore have very little right to claim to direct the
operations. In fact, they are recipients of some funding, in the the money
going to pay for relocation.
So the real value is political. It gets governments off the hook and puts the
directional power in the hands of a committee where the consumer and activist
groups have the right to majority representation. You would obviously need to
have industry representation on this committee, and scientific representation
(although perhaps only in the form of advice).
Each country is different in the way it approaches these problems, but if we
could generate a world-wide demand for such a levy, it would be very hard for
governments to resist.
--
Stewart Fist - writer and columnist
See http://www.theaustralian.com.au/techno/columns/fist.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/http/sfist/ (some archives)
http://www.electric-words.com (main archives)
70 Middle Harbour Road, Lindfield, 2070, N.S.W, Australia
Phone +61 2 9416 7458 Fax +61 2 9416 4582
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html