Public debate is necessary. Operators are installing a new network at a frantic pace that even exceeds the wishes of the economy and the majority in Parliament.
Member of the National Council, SP, ZH and initiator of the Parliamentary Group on Non-Ionizing Radiation, Environment and Health (PGNIS)
Development of data traffic – not without the participation of the population
We must note that the mobile telephone sector is setting up a new network at a frenetic pace that even exceeds the wishes of the economy and those of the majority in Parliament.
But who gave the order to Swisscom, Sunrise, Salt and UPC for this infrastructure expansion?
Not the population! Not the municipalities! Not the cantons! Or did we ask for them? No, the upgrade is being done without the mandate of the population.
The management of Roche, Google, UBS, Givaudan, Swisscom and other major companies have advised the Federal Council and defined Switzerland’s digitalisation strategy to date. Thus, only the earnings prospects determine the population’s needs in terms of data provision. The population should thus be able to stream, broadcast, download, download more, e-banking, / shop/ share data / vote / operate/ monitor / be monitored and so on and so forth. Soon we will no longer have to talk to each other: By the time we have put a thought in words, someone will have already answered it online.
What we have never asked the population is whether they actually wanted for no corner of Switzerland to be left unconnected to the network, i.e. that were not exposed to mobile phones or WIFI radiation. Are there 100,000, 500,000 or one million radiation-sensitive inhabitants whose well-being is limited or even exposed to unbearable health risks? This number is not relevant because our federal constitution guarantees physical integrity and protects minorities. All this is flouted if the economy alone can decide what is beneficial and and will generate returns quickly. Those who do not promise them any income are ignored.
The transition from 4G to 5G is, as the economy rightly says, a quantum leap. The new 5G technology allows transferable data to be multiplied by a hundred and thereby also increases the risk that one would be much more exposed to the waves. This is what I experienced in the industrial area of my municipality when the new technology was installed, then experimented on all the workers during field tests to determine how to implement 5G technology in order to get maximum power. Complaints about physical disorders were not taken seriously.
All critical issues concerning exposure, long-term effects, control of one’s own devices, and even reducing mobile phone exposure to radiation to the ear, are disruptive factors for the mobile phone industry. I also wonder if we really need this expansion when more than 90% of the equipment is used for entertainment services and a cable connection would ensure lower radiation and a more reliable supply. If the public had a veto, it would trigger a discussion and raise questions such as: What do we really need? How can we protect ourselves? How can we prevent damage to our health, genetic material, environment and wildlife in the medium to long term? And how can we protect our friends and acquaintances who are electrohypersensitive and who will be entitled to a healthy environment free from radiation?
Public debate is necessary, with or without popular initiative, with or without objections to the antennas, whether industry and authorities do so voluntarily or under pressure.