Phone Mast Update from Valerie Vaz

Well the mast is finished and it is a total eyesore on Beacon Road.

Our local councillors have not replied to a further E-Mail sent by myself asking for clarification for the readers of this blog. I did see Andrian Andrew’s comments in the Great Barr Observer and I understand a Conservative leaflet has been delivered today in which they have blamed Vodafone.

I am proud that this blog first brought to the attention of people the issue with the mast and the confusion we feel. We should remember that Walsall Council did refuse permission within the 56 days notice and Vodafone are claiming that they never received this.

Valerie Vaz MP (Walsall South LAB) has been kind enough to contact myself with this statement

“I have spoken to Vodafone and I put it to them that their position on whether they received notice of refusal for planning permission should be argued before the Courts. I consider they were deemed to have notice. If they do not take down the mast, the consumers of Pheasey may not want to purchase Vodafone or O2 products. They told me they will meet with the Council on the 21 July. I hope they realise this is not an appropriate position for the mast”

10 thoughts on “Phone Mast Update from Valerie Vaz

  1. Oh, for pity’s sake.

    They buy the product but don’t want the infrastructure near them? The law is quite clear on this matter, and Valerie is clearly no legal genius. Permission in such installations is deemed granted if no objection received. The council can’t prove it because they didn’t send it registered.

    Not one of you NIMBYs has yet given a reason why these things are OK to have in other neighbourhoods, but not your own. I trust the all concerned will be dumping their mobiles forthwith and going back to the call box – including Valerie.

    I’d love to know what’s so special about your neighbourhood that it can’t accommodate the same things as others. I live within half a mile of four separate installations, and my cat isn’t yet radioactive. I have, however, got cracking Voda reception, as well as a healthy sense of proportion.

    You want all the benefits of modern life but none of the side effects.


  2. thing is Bob the company totally ignored planning permission was refused, that was clear. Maybe the council should have made more effort to tell them. However this is an illegal development like any others we get.

  3. The council had a duty to inform them. I have explained that the system doesn’t work as normal planning permission to you before. The council have to reject. They clearly didn’t do so in a traceable manner.

    It’s not an illegal development if the council didn’t fulfil it’s obligations in law. The fact that they are not challenging it shows that they haven’t a leg to stand on.

    Nobody has died, it’s a mobile phone base station the same size as lighting columns around it.

    You have still yet to answer any of the points I raised. This is nothing but naked NIMBYism.


  4. Nope Bob, the council did inform them, I would query how well they tried and the planning rejection was put on the website within days of the condition.

    why they are not challenging is an answer I will ask ..

  5. No, Ian, stop being evasive. The council cannot prove they notified the erectors, so therefore they did not. We are expected to believe they sent out such a critical piece of legal documentation without proof of delivery. Unless there’s proof, you’re shafted in law.

    Any time you want to answer my points, please do. You’ve utterly failed to explain why Pheasey is too special to have this kind of installation and are still wilfully failing to acknowledge the way this planning system works.

    Consent is deemed given unless the council object. In writing. In the form of a legal document. Putting it on a website is not legally relevant or valid. The planning people know the drill.


  6. On the first point I totally agree Bob and that is the council’s fault …

    on the second point we need one but it is the location Bob that counts, Whole lot of Masts for example near the Asda

  7. maybe paint it a nice colour? oh come on people there’s better things going on in our lives surely than to worry about an over sized telegraph pole near a busy junction, i could understand it if they stuck it on top of the barrbeacon.

  8. Well Bob what a vociferous guy you are.! I live within a spit of said mast and where it is placed is an absolute eyesore.We who live on Park Farm Estate are a tight knit community who are proud of our estate ,its shops and its VERY popular public house which acts as a meeting place for us.The mast is stuck opposite the pub on a narrow pavement.It is ugly and not at all what we want to see on this spot of the estate. NO-ONE is saying NIMBY..Just find a more appropriate ,less intrusive spot.! Why not on Beacon Road where the other tall poles have been erected.It would fit in nicely there !

  9. Try researching the NRPB levels of radiation allowed they are scandalously above USA and most of Europe,and cancer clusters and illnesses worldwide in locations by masts.Also the WHO is very disturbed by the siting of them in residential areas.I am surprised at you BOB! DJ.

Comments are closed.