PROTESTORS who fought plans for a mobile phone mast on the tower of Hawes parish church were dismayed when a church court ruled the scheme could go ahead.

The consistory court of the Diocese of Ripon and Leeds granted permission for the mast in spite of strong objections on health, heritage and religious grounds.

Diocesan chancellor Judge Simon Grenfell's announcement on Wednesday brought disappointment to campaigners, who fear it will open the floodgates to similar proposals for other churches.

They made a last-ditch, impassioned plea to the parochial church council, which has the final say on whether the mast goes up.

Judge Grenfell ruled that other parishes considering installing telecommunications equipment would not in future need to provide "cogent and compelling evidence" that there was no health risk provided emission levels were within government guidelines. He concluded that future objections regarding churches were unlikely to succeed.

About 60 people objected formally to Vodafone's application for St Margaret's Church, many of them concerned about possible health risks.

Judge Grenfell ruled that there was no evidence to suggest the Hawes mast posed risks, as emissions would be well below internationally permitted levels. He imposed a condition that levels should be monitored frequently.

He also ruled that telecommunications masts were not inappropriate for places of worship.

The diocesan advisory committee, which included experts in architecture, heritage and planning, had already recommended the scheme should go ahead.

Judge Grenfell referred to the Archbishop's council of the Church of England, which concluded it was not sacrilegious to use a church tower for mobile phone masts.

Such use was part of the church's community role, he said.

He also dismissed the concerns of protestors worried about indecent and immoral information being transmitted via the mast.

"So long as a telecommunications company does not promote, for example, indecent traffic over its network, it cannot be said to be responsible for such traffic any more than a highways authority is responsible for the way in which people drive on its roads," he said.

Jane Macintosh, of Ings House, Hawes, who gave evidence on behalf of objectors, felt it was morally wrong for the church to benefit from rent from the mast.

A worshipper at St Margaret's, she accepted the church needed to raise money but said there were alternative means.

She argued the church was a holy place for spiritual reflection and likened the mast application to the Biblical moneylenders in the temple.

She also told the hearing that the mast row had strained relationships between St Margaret's and the community.

Continued on page 3