CONTRIBUTION · 16th October 2011
NO Radio transmitting or surveillance device of any kind is permitted on this private property without the knowledge and express written consent of the owners.
BC Hydro has been given legal notice that no "Smart Meter" may be installed at this address and notice to principle is notice to agent.
The Charter of Rights takes precedence over
any other legislation to the contrary and the owners hereby deny the right to install any invasive and harmful device anywhere on this property.
This is the text of the sign that has appeared beside the old meter on the side of my home since a few days before the installation process began. The "legal notice" had been provided by sending a form letter by registered mail to BC Hydro.
The more I learn about the so called "smart meter", the more I think "dumb meter" or "greed meter" is an appropriate term for them. I found it ironic to hear that in England, where Gordon Campbell has been sent as Emissary, the transmitting kind of "smart meters" have been rejected due to the health risks they may present to the population. ( They have opted for the fibre-optic method instead.) At the beginning I had some serious concerns as to the need for these devices and why legislation was needed to force acceptance of technology that was supposedly in our best interest.
Health concerns and privacy issues are now rampant. I went to Worksafe BC and asked for an opinion after they had been installed in some businesses. I was told that there was "conflicting scientific evidence" with regard to the safety of "smart meters". (Not just conflicting evidence mind you, but conflicting "scientific" evidence). So, the ONLY way to ensure safety is to stop installing them, even removing them when they have already been installed, until a more definitive assessment has been completed.
They (the transmitting kind) have been rejected in many places now and I refuse to believe that the scientific principles involved change as we cross international boundaries or that people elsewhere are more worthy of protection than we are.
City Council has not only the right, but the legal obligation to act on behalf of citizens with regard to safety issues. City has acted on the use of insecticides not long ago, and the World Health Organization has rated the transmitting smart meter at the same level as DDT as a carcinogen. This, of course, is my personal opinion, but if the general consensus in Terrace is to treat the "smart meter" the same as DDT in terms of a by-law, I would have no qualms in bringing this motion before council.