Given that this is an election year, in May 2014, I prepared a formal Election Questionnaire on behalf of www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz and sent it to all the parties I knew to be contesting the 2014 general election.
For the record, I am neither a member of any political party, nor a donor to any political party.
Below is the response from the Green party (https://www.greens.org.nz/). For a more general discussion of the 2014 Election Questionnaire and links to replies from other parties contesting the 2014 general election, please see this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/2014-election-questionnaire-2/
A general discussion of the responses from the political parties may be found at this link: https://stopsmartmeters.org.nz/uncategorized/2014-election-questionnaire-general-discussion/ (Reading this link is recommended for people who are new to the “smart meter” issue as it helps to put the statements made in some of the party responses into the overall context of the “smart meter” situation in NZ.)
The Green Party did not complete the 2014 Election Questionnaire, but did issue a written statement on the “Smart meter” issue.
Below the response that was received from the Green party on June 15, 2014.
Green Party response to Stop Smart Meters questions:
Smart meters reduce the carbon footprint of electricity reticulation because they do not require vehicular movement to regularly read meters and because they facilitate more efficient use of power stations, lines and sub-stations and thereby reduce the need to build new electricity generation and reticulation infrastructure.
With regard to the safety of smart meters, the Green Party’s position is guided by the evidence available. Research [Website editor’s note: This “research” has been debunked and you can read a critique here: www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz/latest-news/report-on-health-and-safety-aspects-of-electricity-smart-meters-debunked/ ] into this issue (to which this questionnaire itself refers at Question 8 below) has been undertaken by the Electric Power Engineering Centre (EPEC) of the University of Canterbury the Smart meters use one or more RF transceiver in the 900MHz, 1.8GHz or 2.4GHz band. The University of Canterbury EPEC research affirms that during transmission (normally limited to a maximum of 50% of the time and in practice usually very much less than this), smart meters radiate RF power.
The research acknowledges that RF radiation causes heating of body tissue. International standards for maximum personal exposure (MPE) to RF radiation for members of the general public, based on reducing the heating effect to 1/50th of the amount shown to cause noticeable effects in laboratory animals, are in force and must be complied with.
In NZ the current standard is NZS2772: Part 1: 1999, which is to all intents and purposes identical to other national and international standards.
In practice they radiate much less power than this allowance and then for only a small fraction of the time, but even if they radiate the maximum amount, on both bands simultaneously, all the time, and the worst case additive reflection occurs, at any distance greater than 1m from the meter, the exposure is less than 35% of the allowable limit.
The text of the 2014 election questionnaire sent to each political party was the following:
Political Parties’ Questionnaire (2014)
The new “smart meters” being introduced to measure electricity and water consumption use radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in the microwave range to transmit information to electricity and water suppliers. The RFR used has been classified by the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a “possible carcinogen” (Type 2b.)
The website www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz provides New Zealanders with a local source of information about “smart meters” in NZ. It covers health, privacy and other “smart-meter”-related issues that are important to families and businesses.
The www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz questionnaire will be sent to all political parties and the results will be posted on www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz and will also be featured in the regular newsletters sent to the email list.
Please reply to this questionnaire by June 15, 2014. Thank you.
Replies may be emailed to [email address was here but has been removed from this online posting to prevent spamming]
Name of political party:
Name of person completing the form:
Position in political party: Email:
Question 1: Does your party have a formal policy on “smart meters”. YES NO [Please circle/highlight]
If YES, is your party’s policy on “smart meters” available online at your party’s website? YES NO
If YES, please put URL where this information may be accessed:
Question 2: Does your party support the introduction of “smart” meters for electricity?
YES NO [Please circle/ highlight]
Why or Why not?
Question 3: The current legislation only stipulates the electricity meters must have a current certificate of accuracy, yet some power companies are using this legislation to force people to have “smart meters”. Does your party support the right of people to retain a functioning analogue (Ferraris) meter if they do not want a microwave-radiation emitting “smart meter” measuring electricity consumption at their home?
YES NO [Please circle/ highlight]
Why or Why not?
Question 4: Some electricity companies are trying to coerce customers into accepting “smart meters” by including in their Terms and Conditions clauses to the effect that the customer must accept a “smart meter” (the inference being that their electricity could be cut off if they do not accept a “smart meter”.) Will your party change the relevant legislation/regulations to make it illegal for companies to try to intimidate customers to accept “smart meters” through such means?
YES NO [Please circle/ highlight]
Why or Why not?
Question 5: Members of the public have reported to www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz that once a “smart meter” has been installed it can be very difficult to get it removed, even when it is causing health issues. Will your party make changes to the relevant legislation/regulations so that companies are legally obliged to remove “smart meters” promptly (and replace them with either a modern analogue – Ferraris – meter or another non-smart meter of the customer’s choice) when a customer makes a request for the removal of a “smart meter”?
YES NO [Please circle/highlight]
Why or Why not?
Question 6: In their Terms and Conditions, some electricity companies claim to own all data gathered by “smart meters” and the right to disclose it to other parties. We believe that this is a significant breach of privacy. Will your party change the legislation/regulations governing the electricity industry so that data gathered by “smart meters” may be used only for billing purposes and make it an offence to supply this information to any other party (with the exception of the account holder and the police if there is cause to believe that there is/was criminal activity at a home or other building.)
YES NO [Please circle/highlight]
Why/Why not?
Question 7: Given that the RFR produced by “smart meters” is a possible type 2 carcinogen, does your party support a moratorium on further “smart meter” installations until comprehensive research has been conducted into “smart meter” health effects?
YES NO [Please circle/highlight]
Why/Why not?
Question 8: Given that the EPEC Report states that “a sensible approach” is to site “smart meters” somewhere where people are “unlikely to spend longer than a few minutes per day at a distance of less than 1 metre from them,” does your party support a ban on placing “smart meters” on bedroom walls?
YES NO [Please circle/highlight]
Why/Why not?
Question 9: Does your party support the introduction of “smart” meters for water?
YES NO [Please circle/highlight]
Why/Why not?
Thank you for your time.
Recent Comments