Chamber
Plenary, 11 May 2000
11 May 2000 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Telecommunications
I am pleased to speak in this debate. The first report of the Transport and the Environment Committee is the result of a great deal of investigation. Committee members have worked well; they have achieved consensus and a result that, if implemented, would be in the best interests of the people of Scotland.
It is regrettable that the summary report of the Stewart inquiry was not available to members until this morning, particularly given that the media was telephoning me—and I presume other members of the committee—last night, asking for comment on the report, which had been issued to them. I would have thought that the Executive and the Government in London would have realised by now that journalistic spin is not an acceptable alternative to democratic accountability. However, that is an on-going issue, which the Scottish Parliament will have to deal with properly in the near future.
Today, we are dealing with the proliferation of mobile telephone masts across our country and the legitimate concerns surrounding that issue. All members will have had some representation from concerned parents about masts being erected near schools, or from people who have arrived home to find themselves in the shadow of such a mast. As our convener said, in some cases, such as Lister Tower in East Kilbride, the masts are erected on the buildings themselves. In all those cases, there are valid concerns about the reports of potential adverse effects on health and the impact on the visual environment.
The Transport and the Environment Committee tackled the task of reporting on those concerns very seriously. We took evidence from a range of bodies during the inquiry; we received more than 100 written submissions and heard evidence from 20 organisations and individuals. The report was agreed unanimously and our main conclusion is that the erection of masts for mobile telephones should be a matter for full planning controls. That is the only way in which the views and concerns of people most directly affected by the masts can be properly addressed.
In addition, planning authorities confirm that the work load for councils is almost exactly the same for planning applications as it is for the prior approval system previously favoured by the Executive. However, the suggested fees for the prior approval system are lower. If the auction of licences to the industry can rake in £22 billion for Gordon Brown's daily inflating war chest, why should Scottish councils have to subsidise the same industry's on-going approvals?
Health, environment and the right of the public to notification and consultation are just some of the reasons why I have concerns about the Executive's seeming reluctance to accept in full the recommendations of the committee. I suspect that the Executive will now move some way towards full planning controls, but I am concerned about the statement issued by the minister in which she worries about neighbour notification. The people who live in the areas where masts are being erected have the right to prior notification and to have input into the siting of such masts.
The minister is adamant that we should not lose sight of the beneficial effects of the expansion of the mobile phone system. However, I am confident that local authorities, local government officers and, most important, the people who have to live, work, play and go to school in the shadow of the masts have the intelligence and wit to weigh up the pros and cons of where those masts are sited. After all, who knows the needs of an area better than the people who live and work there?
I exercise the precautionary principle in welcoming the Executive's response that it intends to move some way towards the committee's recommendations. I give a cautious welcome to the minister's announcement to the press on Tuesday that she will act quickly in examining the matter. However, I contend that the matter has already been examined—by the Transport and the Environment Committee and by the Stewart inquiry. Now it is time for action.
It is regrettable that the summary report of the Stewart inquiry was not available to members until this morning, particularly given that the media was telephoning me—and I presume other members of the committee—last night, asking for comment on the report, which had been issued to them. I would have thought that the Executive and the Government in London would have realised by now that journalistic spin is not an acceptable alternative to democratic accountability. However, that is an on-going issue, which the Scottish Parliament will have to deal with properly in the near future.
Today, we are dealing with the proliferation of mobile telephone masts across our country and the legitimate concerns surrounding that issue. All members will have had some representation from concerned parents about masts being erected near schools, or from people who have arrived home to find themselves in the shadow of such a mast. As our convener said, in some cases, such as Lister Tower in East Kilbride, the masts are erected on the buildings themselves. In all those cases, there are valid concerns about the reports of potential adverse effects on health and the impact on the visual environment.
The Transport and the Environment Committee tackled the task of reporting on those concerns very seriously. We took evidence from a range of bodies during the inquiry; we received more than 100 written submissions and heard evidence from 20 organisations and individuals. The report was agreed unanimously and our main conclusion is that the erection of masts for mobile telephones should be a matter for full planning controls. That is the only way in which the views and concerns of people most directly affected by the masts can be properly addressed.
In addition, planning authorities confirm that the work load for councils is almost exactly the same for planning applications as it is for the prior approval system previously favoured by the Executive. However, the suggested fees for the prior approval system are lower. If the auction of licences to the industry can rake in £22 billion for Gordon Brown's daily inflating war chest, why should Scottish councils have to subsidise the same industry's on-going approvals?
Health, environment and the right of the public to notification and consultation are just some of the reasons why I have concerns about the Executive's seeming reluctance to accept in full the recommendations of the committee. I suspect that the Executive will now move some way towards full planning controls, but I am concerned about the statement issued by the minister in which she worries about neighbour notification. The people who live in the areas where masts are being erected have the right to prior notification and to have input into the siting of such masts.
The minister is adamant that we should not lose sight of the beneficial effects of the expansion of the mobile phone system. However, I am confident that local authorities, local government officers and, most important, the people who have to live, work, play and go to school in the shadow of the masts have the intelligence and wit to weigh up the pros and cons of where those masts are sited. After all, who knows the needs of an area better than the people who live and work there?
I exercise the precautionary principle in welcoming the Executive's response that it intends to move some way towards the committee's recommendations. I give a cautious welcome to the minister's announcement to the press on Tuesday that she will act quickly in examining the matter. However, I contend that the matter has already been examined—by the Transport and the Environment Committee and by the Stewart inquiry. Now it is time for action.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel):
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S1M-803, in the name of Mr Andy Kerr, on behalf of the Transport and the Environment Committee, on that commi...
Mr Andy Kerr (East Kilbride) (Lab):
Lab
I am delighted to open this debate on behalf of the Transport and the Environment Committee. I thank my colleagues for their hard work in producing a thought...
Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I am pleased to speak in this debate. The first report of the Transport and the Environment Committee is the result of a great deal of investigation. Committ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Patricia Ferguson):
Lab
I call Nick Johnston to open for the Conservatives. You have eight minutes, Mr Johnston.
Nick Johnston (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I will try to keep to my time.I stand here this morning as a warning to every young researcher or putative candidate to Parliament—never lodge a members' bus...
Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD):
LD
I am grateful to Nick Johnston for clarifying the Conservative front-bench situation. For a terrible moment, those of us who enjoy transport and the environm...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
We move to the open part of the debate. Members will have four minutes.
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab):
Lab
I am particularly pleased to take part in this debate, as I have been rather vocal on the subject of telecommunications developments since about June last ye...
Bruce Crawford (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP):
SNP
I would like to begin by congratulating the Transport and the Environment Committee on its work and on its report. I think that Andy Kerr did a good job of p...
Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome constituents who have travelled to the Parliament from Strathblane and who have been going through an ordeal with a mast in their area. I thank the...
Euan Robson (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD):
LD
I, too, welcome this report, with the important development that it proposes, and the Stewart report that was published today. There will be widespread agree...
Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab):
Lab
As a member of the Transport and the Environment Committee, I thank my fellow committee members and the staff of the committee for the tremendous amount of w...
Dr Richard Simpson (Ochil) (Lab):
Lab
I wonder if Des McNulty would agree that particular attention should be paid to masts near schools. Bruce Crawford shares my concern about the situation in K...
Des McNulty:
Lab
I am sympathetic to that view and that some of the income coming to local authorities in site rental should be used in that way.Monitoring health risks is a ...
Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I associate myself with all the positive remarks that have been made about the work of the staff on the Transport and the Environment Committee, and I congra...
Cathy Jamieson (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the Stewart committee's report, which was published today, and I am pleased to see that it vindicates many of the recommendations in the Transport ...
Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green):
Green
First, I apologise to the chamber because I must leave this debate early. I have a ceremony to attend at the University of Edinburgh in which I am playing a ...
Elaine Thomson (Aberdeen North) (Lab):
Lab
I am pleased to be taking part in this debate. I congratulate the Transport and the Environment Committee on a thorough and well-considered report. Telecom m...
Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
Carlops, in my constituency, is one of the most famous of the mobile phone mast episodes, but I do not wish to go into the details of that today as we are in...
Dr Simpson:
Lab
I appreciate what the member is going through. Perhaps I can offer some help. A mast was erected in my constituency. Fortunately, it was close to a B-listed ...
Ian Jenkins:
LD
I really do not want to go into the details because there are aspects of our discussions that might involve trees, or whatever.It seems totally unacceptable ...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
I join other members in thanking sincerely the support team led by Lynn Tullis and all those who briefed us in the Transport and the Environment Committee an...
Janis Hughes (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab):
Lab
As a member of the Transport and the Environment Committee, I would like to echo the gratitude of my colleagues to the staff who have helped us through the i...
David Mundell (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I do not hold myself out to have the same expertise in these matters as my colleague Nick Johnston, but I was previously employed by British Telecommunicatio...
Mr Tosh:
Con
In the light of what Mr Mundell has just said, will he comment on the recommendation in the Stewart report that no one should be encouraged to use mobile tel...
David Mundell:
Con
Mr Tosh raises a very interesting point. If regulations are introduced, they should also apply to the use of car radios, as operating a car radio has been id...
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
As others such as Des McNulty have done, I put on record my thanks to the members of staff of the Transport and the Environment Committee. In many instances,...
Nick Johnston:
Con
Would Mr MacAskill be gracious enough—in the spirit of consensus that has evolved in the debate—to acknowledge that we are learning from experience, whereas ...
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
I should be happy to acknowledge that the Conservatives are learning from the past, although I would not go beyond that.The most important issue is to decide...
The Minister for Transport and the Environment (Sarah Boyack):
Lab
I listened with interest to the many excellent contributions throughout the debate. The debate has been marked by the consistently high quality of those cont...