Warning! Radio Politics.

Readers may recall my frothing at the mouth recently in response to a very curious activity being undertaken by OFCOM in relation to EMF safety.

'G' amateur operations are very different from '5G' telecoms...

Without a shadow of a doubt, the overriding motivation for OFCOM's consultation - which the RSGB seems to think is perfectly sensible - is the introduction of 5G mobile telecoms to the UK.  Recently, there have been a number of cases of 5G masts being burned following social media claims - obviously wholly untrue - that 5G spreads Coronavirus.

Now, quite what 5G microwave transmitters have to do with amateur operations is anybody's guess.

But then I decided I wasn't going to guess.  I was going to require answers.  In my experience, the RSGB, when pushed into a corner, doesn't like providing answers.  Indeed, as a limited company, it  does not legally have to respond to requests for information - even from the members who pay for its very existence.

So, in about a month's time, we should have information from OFCOM, who are legally obliged to answer, that may shed some light on exactly how we came to be in this stupid position, and what role, if any, the representative body of amateur radio in the UK had in it.  For those of a nervous disposition, the following is very dry and adversarial for a reason: give a public authority half a chance to avoid answering difficult questions, and it will...

Freedom of Information Act 2000

I make a request for information pursuant to s1(1) of FoIA 2000 as follows, noting that if this is not the correct email address/recipient, I am not obliged to do anything other than successfully deliver it to OFCOM; it is for OFCOM to communicate the request to the correct person internally:

In relation to your recent consultation on the proposals to compel mobile phone operators and amateur radio operators to ensure compliance with radiation safety (EMF) measures, please provide the following:

(1) Information, to include full citations, that demonstrates (a) academic or other similarly authoritative and reliable evidence of harm or likely harm caused by amateur radio operations (and not mobile telecommunications operations) within the UK or without, mindful of the typical limitations upon amateur operators, notably the relatively low antenna gain available, low legal power limits, very low duty cycles, and distance of antenna from a typical, realistically-presented exposed subject within the context of UK installations.  For the avoidance of doubt, the latter stipulations should not consider such examples as a person standing at 1m in front of a 4-element Yagi antenna at 400W input power as realistic.

(2) Information, in its widest sense, that demonstrates the route within and without OFCOM as to how and why amateur radio operators in the UK came to be included with mobile phone operators.

(3) Information, in its widest sense, as to how and why the OFCOM consultation response form has as its file name 'response-form-5g-emf', which indicates the consultation always had as its motivation the roll out of 5G, and not concern over amateur operations.

(4) Information amounting to, in practical effect, copies of all correspondence between OFCOM and the RSGB (including the reverse direction), concerning this consultation and proposals, within the period January 01, 2018 to the date of this request, inclusive.

(5) Information, in its widest sense, amounting to, in practical effect, copies of internal and external correspondence concerning this consultation and its proposals within the same date range as (4) above.

Please note that, pursuant to s1(b), such information as you hold in relation to the above points must be communicated to the applicant within the statutory period of 20 working days (which is not relaxed by the present pandemic).

Please note that section 77 states that it is a criminal offence to alter, block, destroy or conceal information. Depending on the nature of the incident, an authority or its individual members of staff could be charged with this offence. The penalty is a fine.

It is not expected that an exemption may be lawfully applied in relation to incomplete, ongoing work/reports, because the enquiry is not concerned with the outcome of your consultation, merely information leading up to it. Any other exemption you may wish to rely upon should (and must by law) be clearly cited.

Please note that consent to transmit or use personal details outside of those persons reasonably required to respond to the request is not granted, and if not observed, will breach Data Protection legislation.

Please note that attempts to block publication of any FoIA 2000 response under The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 will not be observed or enforceable, given the specific exemptions provided for news reporting and fair comment.