Chamber
Plenary, 11 May 2000
11 May 2000 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Telecommunications
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 and helped us produce this report.
I want to begin by making clear that I am an enthusiastic supporter of technology in all its forms. Laptops, computers, pagers, mobile phones—you name it, I am sure I use it. I recognise that in the global economy of the 21st century it is critical to ensure that all parts of Scotland, even the most rural, are served, so that we can lead the field and win a competitive advantage.
The precautionary principle has been fought for by Friends of the Earth and community groups across Scotland. Their efforts are beginning to illustrate how politicians can be pressured to respond.
I am concerned to note that the Department of Trade and Industry does not have plans to ensure early 100 per cent coverage on the ground that the remotest parts of the country have few, if any, potential subscribers. Surely the safety implications for lone travellers must be considered. Many such travellers will be professionals—doctors, nurses and tradesmen—who need to keep in touch with others. That applies particularly to Tavish Scott when he wants to contact Lesley Riddoch, or vice versa.
In my mailbag and in public meetings, the issues of most concern are the health risks, the environmental impact of masts being erected outside people's homes and their lack of a right to object. That public concern appears to be vindicated in the report, published today, by Sir William Stewart.
In his report, Sir William states that the balance of evidence to date suggests
"that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below"
the guidelines set by the National Radiological Protection Board and the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection. Under the latter body's guidelines,
"the maximum levels of exposure of the public are about five times less than those recommended for workers. The reason for this approach was the possibility that some members of the general public might be particularly sensitive to RF radiation . . . This does not necessarily mean that these effects lead to disease or injury, but it is potentially important information".
I welcome in particular the Stewart report's recommendation that
"the ICNIP guidelines for public exposure be adopted for use in the UK rather than the NRPB guidelines. This would bring the UK into line with other countries in the European Union and accord with the Recommendations of the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology Report on Mobile Phones and Health".
I warmly welcome the minister's acceptance of a number of the recommendations in the Transport and the Environment Committee's report. In particular, I am extremely pleased that the Executive recognises the health implications of mobile phone technologies. It is absolutely right to accept that the protection of public health is a priority.
In his report, Sir William Stewart calls for the establishment of clearly defined physical exclusion zones around station antennae to delineate areas within which exposure guidelines may be exceeded. The incorporation of exclusion zones should be part of the template for the planning protocols that are being considered by the minister.
I am pleased that the two reports agree in many areas. From my experience as a member of the planning committee in Fife Council, I know how actions flowing from the reports will begin to address the concerns of families. The big question for all of us will be how to take action swiftly enough to protect people right now in the face of burgeoning applications for the development of mobile phone masts. Sylvia Jackson spoke very well on that point.
The final challenge will concern what to do with masts that have already been erected but do not match the recommendations made in the two reports—especially when they are in school grounds or hospitals. I welcome the commitment in the minister's responses to the Transport and the Environment Committee to act swiftly. I know that people right across Scotland will welcome that.
I want to begin by making clear that I am an enthusiastic supporter of technology in all its forms. Laptops, computers, pagers, mobile phones—you name it, I am sure I use it. I recognise that in the global economy of the 21st century it is critical to ensure that all parts of Scotland, even the most rural, are served, so that we can lead the field and win a competitive advantage.
The precautionary principle has been fought for by Friends of the Earth and community groups across Scotland. Their efforts are beginning to illustrate how politicians can be pressured to respond.
I am concerned to note that the Department of Trade and Industry does not have plans to ensure early 100 per cent coverage on the ground that the remotest parts of the country have few, if any, potential subscribers. Surely the safety implications for lone travellers must be considered. Many such travellers will be professionals—doctors, nurses and tradesmen—who need to keep in touch with others. That applies particularly to Tavish Scott when he wants to contact Lesley Riddoch, or vice versa.
In my mailbag and in public meetings, the issues of most concern are the health risks, the environmental impact of masts being erected outside people's homes and their lack of a right to object. That public concern appears to be vindicated in the report, published today, by Sir William Stewart.
In his report, Sir William states that the balance of evidence to date suggests
"that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below"
the guidelines set by the National Radiological Protection Board and the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection. Under the latter body's guidelines,
"the maximum levels of exposure of the public are about five times less than those recommended for workers. The reason for this approach was the possibility that some members of the general public might be particularly sensitive to RF radiation . . . This does not necessarily mean that these effects lead to disease or injury, but it is potentially important information".
I welcome in particular the Stewart report's recommendation that
"the ICNIP guidelines for public exposure be adopted for use in the UK rather than the NRPB guidelines. This would bring the UK into line with other countries in the European Union and accord with the Recommendations of the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology Report on Mobile Phones and Health".
I warmly welcome the minister's acceptance of a number of the recommendations in the Transport and the Environment Committee's report. In particular, I am extremely pleased that the Executive recognises the health implications of mobile phone technologies. It is absolutely right to accept that the protection of public health is a priority.
In his report, Sir William Stewart calls for the establishment of clearly defined physical exclusion zones around station antennae to delineate areas within which exposure guidelines may be exceeded. The incorporation of exclusion zones should be part of the template for the planning protocols that are being considered by the minister.
I am pleased that the two reports agree in many areas. From my experience as a member of the planning committee in Fife Council, I know how actions flowing from the reports will begin to address the concerns of families. The big question for all of us will be how to take action swiftly enough to protect people right now in the face of burgeoning applications for the development of mobile phone masts. Sylvia Jackson spoke very well on that point.
The final challenge will concern what to do with masts that have already been erected but do not match the recommendations made in the two reports—especially when they are in school grounds or hospitals. I welcome the commitment in the minister's responses to the Transport and the Environment Committee to act swiftly. I know that people right across Scotland will welcome that.
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...