PARISHIONERS at Garlinge near Margate are worried that a mobile telephone mast will be erected outside St James church. Church warden Peter Reed said that the Orange telecommunication group had offered the church more than £60,000 to place masts on the church tower and in the grounds of the church hall but had been refused.

Now he fears planning permission could be given to put the mast up immediately outside the boundary wall that surrounds the church hall, which is also known as Old School Hall.

He said: “The adverse effects of the emissions from the masts is still something of an unknown quantity and the equipment is certainly not allowed to be installed on school land in Kent. The church all is used throughout the day for children’s activities such as playgroups, youth clubs, as a meeting place for cubs, scouts, beavers, guides and brownies, and for parties.

“It would be inconsiderate and irresponsible if the council granted planning permission for something that could adversely affect this centre of village life. Hopefully community welfare will be considered more important than council cash.”

An international expert on the effects of microwave radiation has supported campaigns around the UK against antennae being erected in or near residential area. Physicist Gerard Hyland from the University of Warwick, Coventry, said worldwide research has shown adverse health effects from this form of radiation, including headaches, short-term memory and concentration problems, sleeping disruption, chronic fatigue, anxiety plus other symptoms like muscular twitches and nose bleeds. It also can effect the way heart pacemakers operate.

Dr Hyland said: “Just as in an epidemic, not everyone will be affected, but I believe one person is too many when the installation of a mast in a residential area can be refused.

“The digital natures of the signals used is of particular concern because of its influence on brain-wave activity and its degrading effect on the robustness and efficiency of the human immune system.”

Dr Hyland stressed that existing guidelines “afford no protection” against such effects and are “quite inadequate”. He added: “Planning permission should be refused on the grounds it could compromise public health and safety, not only in the young but also in the elderly who live in the immediate vicinity of the proposed installation.”