Official Report 248KB pdf
Skin Cancer (PE931)
Good morning. I welcome everyone to the third meeting in 2006 of the Public Petitions Committee. I have received apologies from Helen Eadie, John Farquhar Munro and John Scott. Although Jackie Baillie is here, she has to go to the meeting of the Communities Committee; Sandra White, too, has to leave when an appropriate moment arises. [Interruption.] As soon as I have given Helen Eadie's apologies, she turns up. At least that makes up our numbers.
In Scotland, skin cancer has reached epidemic proportions. About 11,000 new cases are diagnosed annually and many young people die unnecessarily from the condition. Skin cancer figures continue to rise every year, so today we are presenting a petition that urges MSPs to support the implementation of health education programmes and to encourage people who have skin tumours to seek advice as early as possible.
Thank you. I now open up the meeting to members' questions.
I thank the petitioner for submitting the petition, which deals with an issue that interests and concerns me. I have many questions, but I will try not to blurt them out all at once.
Just one or two questions at a time, Rosie.
I might not get any answers if I ask all my questions at one time.
There are two aspects. First, men are generally more resistant to health education messages and so take longer to change their behaviour. Secondly, men tend to be more reluctant and take longer to come forward with health problems that they are concerned about. Men have yet to change that behaviour. They also present with a melanoma or other tumours later, so treatment for them is less likely to be curative.
I notice that there can be 20 to 30 years between exposure and development of cancer. Fewer sunbeds were around 20 to 30 years ago and skin cancer figures are now increasing. I am certain that sunbeds and an increase in holidays abroad have played a role in the increase, so education is important.
There is evidence that accumulative exposure increases the risk of non-melanoma skin cancer, which is related to sunburn episodes. Therefore, the answer to your question is that there is an association. In clinical practice, I see many patients who have skin cancers but who have never been outside Scotland and have never been on sunbeds. However, I am sure that a large part of the increase is related to people living longer, people going on holidays and sunbed exposure.
The ozone layer is not as yet really a significant issue for us here in Scotland. As Professor Ferguson said, outdoor workers tend to have a greater lifetime exposure.
Many of us get sunburn here in Scotland during our childhood—I know that I did. I have serious concerns that poorer families and bigger families might not be able to afford expensive sunblock. I am not talking about factor 4 or factor 10 tan-building creams; I am talking about complete blocks. My understanding is that only people who have certain skin conditions can get sunblock on prescription. Would it be helpful if families could get sunblock on prescription to protect children and enable them to go out and play in the sun? It can cost £9 or even £18 to cover a family of four children for a week so that they can go out to play. Is that an issue? Would it help if sunblock were available on prescription for children?
Sunscreen is certainly part of the protection strategy that we advise. The most effective option is to keep out of the sun when the sun is at its strongest. It is also important to cover children up by ensuring that they have tee-shirts and hats on and to use sunscreen on sun-exposed areas of skin. We are already working towards having sunscreen made a zero-rated VAT product. If sunscreen were to be readily available from general practitioners that would be all well and good, but I fear that that is a long way off. Sunscreen is part of an overall protection strategy. The first part is to keep children's clothes on to protect their skin from the sun or for them to be in the shade or indoors.
I am sure that that is a good idea. Part of the schools programme—a pilot study—that was funded by the new opportunities fund related to regular use of sunscreen at schools. For such a programme to be successful it would be very helpful if sunscreen was made available.
So it is a health and safety matter as well. Do trade unions have a role to play in respect of workers?
Yes.
Education is important because men are too macho to put on sunscreen. Are there countries in the world that are dealing effectively with the problem through education? I believe that there is a big campaign in Australia; part of it is that people can get sunscreened on the way to the beach. Do good initiatives exist that would assist us?
That is undoubtedly the case. Fortuitously, I happened to be working in Australia in 1981, when the "slip! slop! slap!" campaign began. Then, it had been worked out from the epidemiology of Australia's epidemic that eventually everyone of pale-skinned origins in that country would develop skin cancer. A substantial and highly successful campaign was launched, for which the help of many famous sportsmen was enlisted. The corner has now been turned in Australia—you are right that sunscreen is now available free virtually everywhere. One can certainly get free sunscreen on the beach, for example. The main thing is that having a tan and being brown are no longer desirable for Australian youth—when young people are convinced that being pale is more interesting, a corner has really been turned.
I do not know whether being pale is always more interesting than being tanned. I admit that I quite like to get a bit of sun because it makes me feel better. That is why people like to get a tan.
A survey that was conducted recently in Dundee and Perth and Kinross revealed the deterioration that has taken place. The sunbeds that are available now are much stronger and clients use them for much shorter times. The figures from the study—which is being prepared for publication—show that 83 per cent of the beds that were surveyed had a UV output that exceeds the British and European standards. The shorter wavelengths that burn are a major concern. It is worrying that since the 1997 survey was carried out, the number of unregulated private tanning parlours has increased by 30 per cent. In addition, the number of beds or stand-up cubicles per parlour has gone up significantly and the lamps that are used are more powerful. The fact that there are coin-operated beds means that no records are kept.
My problem is that no one is monitoring the parlours that I have visited. The Executive obviously has a role to play, but councils do too, because they can license parlours if they wish to. I know that Renfrewshire Council licenses them, whereas Glasgow City Council and other councils do not. Your advertising and education campaign will be about covering up during certain hours, but could it also highlight the fact that sunbeds are dangerous? Would it be within the Executive's scope to do that?
I should say that there is a slight error in the agenda: I actually work for Health Scotland, not for the Scottish Executive.
I am glad that you have cleared that up.
I must also clarify that I am speaking as a consultant in public health medicine, not as a representative of Health Scotland. I have been instructed to make that point.
We have known for some time that campaigns that warn people about the dangers to their health have an impact; I am thinking specifically about smoking. For a long time there have been campaigns warning people not to smoke, but it was recognised that it was not enough to warn people not to smoke without actually banning the advertising of cigarettes. I see some similarity to the sunbed issue: we ask people to be careful about their health and to avoid the sun, but we see adverts that glamorise suntans and encourage people to buy products that will give them a nice suntan. Do we need to take the same attitude to sunbeds that we took to smoking? Is it enough for us to say, "Be careful of your health" or do we have to stop the glamorisation of suntan?
Yes. Over the past two years or so, some advertisements have focused specifically on the unseen damage to the skin. One advertisement starts off with a bathing beauty, only for the camera to show a completely destroyed skin and the wrinkles that appear in later life. Some advertisements take responsibility by saying that tanning too early is not so glamorous. We need to keep promoting that approach to let people know that tanning is unhealthy and that it ages the skin.
Should tour operators, airlines and the people who take us to the sun play a greater role? For example, in-flight magazines portray people having great holidays in their swimming trunks and bikinis. Should the travel industry highlight the danger that people can put themselves in when they are in the sun?
There is no doubt that they should. We do not want people to avoid tanning totally; it is a pleasurable experience, and there are artificial tans that can produce the desired effect. However, we do ask people to be mindful of intermittent exposure to strong sunlight. That is the kind of message that tour operators could enforce. We have targeted holiday firms in the past so that when people have their passports and tickets returned to them, they get information leaflets so that they know to reduce exposure to sunlight. That is a definite educational opportunity.
We have done some work on that, although there is—understandably—tremendous resistance among tour operators to highlighting the danger of tanning. However, passport offices, Boots the chemists and others who are more forward-looking are willing to help. Generally, however, travel operators are reluctant to help because they would in effect be diminishing the quality of their product for the people who buy it.
I am pleased to see you all here this morning—you are good friends.
There is a balance to be struck. It is important to get enough vitamin D and it is to be hoped that one can get enough from one's diet. The great thing about getting vitamin D from one's diet as opposed to manufacturing it from sunlight is that doing so is not carcinogenic. We therefore encourage people who feel that they need more vitamin D to take fortified vitamin D.
Could you talk about some of the work that has been done in schools?
A report is just about to be published on skin cancer prevention awareness work that was undertaken in pre-school nurseries in Fife and Tayside. The most important finding was that that work increased knowledge of the dangers of sunshine and that the children developed an understanding that we need to cover up and to put on sunscreen. Doing so became part of their way of life in the schools. One of the recommendations of the report will be that such work has to be extended. We need to include not only the carers, teachers and nursery workers but the parents, people in the private sector and councils in order that we can ensure that everyone is fully informed about sun-awareness campaigns for children. Furthermore, we need to extend those campaigns into primary and secondary schools. That is the great dream that would help to ensure that children grow up with a healthy attitude to the sun and the need to protect their skin from it.
I know that there is an issue in respect of television advertising relating to the dangers of the sun. My recollection is that a programme of adverts advising people not to sunbathe kicks in only after we have had three consecutive days of sunshine. That could be an issue because people do not understand that it does not necessarily require sunshine in order for the danger to be present, because the sun can be harmful even when its light comes through clouds. Do you want to say a little bit about that?
The Health Education Board for Scotland, which is the organisation that I used to work for, made a modest effort in that regard. When the Met Office forecast three days of sunny weather in Scotland, a 10-second advert urging people to take care in the sun would appear at the end of the news. In essence, that mechanism was designed to ensure that the adverts would be shown when they were likely to be most effective. We did that for a couple of years, but it does not happen any more.
The figures in your papers say that 6,500 cases could be prevented every year. That is a lot.
There are roughly 6,500 to 7,000 more cases now than there were 20 years ago and they are probably all the result of cosmetic tanning. The general rule of thumb is that about 80 per cent of all skin cancer cases are preventable. Between 8,000 and 8,500 Scots could avoid skin cancer every year if we put enough effort into prevention.
You have mentioned artificial tanning. A local authority recently took an initiative under which people were recruited to go into schools to teach young people how to apply artificial tans. That met with a degree of ridicule in some sectors of the media, but do you think that it was a good initiative? Can such initiatives be positive in helping to address the concerns that you are raising this morning?
Such initiatives can be positive. That sort of artificial tanning is a safe way of getting a tan. It does not involve exposure to the cancer wavelengths. It has been used for many years, and the technology has been greatly improved. It also produces a much better colour now. People used to get an orangey colour, but it is now a much more tan-like colour. If we could persuade sunbed parlours and users to use more of that technology so that people would undergo less of the carcinogenic type of exposure, that would be common sense. The practice is growing and people are increasingly seeing artificial tanning as a sensible way of getting a tan. I would encourage such initiatives.
I have some more worrying anecdotal evidence. About four years ago, my attention was drawn to a woman who was tanning herself a lot. She was very brown, but she felt that the fact that her child's skin was very white made it look obvious that her tan was fake. She therefore took her six-year-old child to unmanned sunbeds so that her kid would be the same colour as she was and her own tan would look more natural. The fact that that can happen should be of huge alarm to all of us. It occurs to me that, as well as skin cancer, other problems could result from that, such as sunstroke and sunburn. I presume that a lot of people present with those conditions at hospital casualty departments.
Yes. People can burn under a sunbed quite easily if they overdo the dose. They might be tempted to put another few coins into the box to up the dose; no one is there to stop them doing it. The story that you have just told is horrific.
I am sorry to go on about this, but I wish to mention the possibility of having a sunbed at home, as people can rent or own them. That makes education particularly important. I think that children would take the lessons on board. Unlike other organs of the body, which can get affected by smoke and so on, the skin is visible. It is less of a mystery, which can make the risks easier to explain. I became more careful about this when I learned—I hope that I am right in saying this in front of you very learned people—that skin has a memory. That struck a chord with me in that any damage can easily be revisited over time. Presenting information such as that is important and young people will easily take it up because it is so in your face—in that sense it is different from showing damage to internal organs as a deterrent to cigarette smoking. I thank the witnesses for their answers.
I thank the witnesses for bringing this important petition. How do members believe that we should approach it?
It has been a moving morning. A year ago, I worked with the Skin Care Campaign Scotland. We organised a conference in the Hub at which Dennis Canavan spoke movingly about the loss of his son, who died from skin cancer. Everyone, including the physicians, found what Dennis said heart-rending. The convener is right that it is important for us to write to NHS Health Scotland, Cancer Research UK, CancerBACUP Scotland, which is a leading information service, the Sunbed Association and the Scottish Executive. We can also write to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, as environmental health officers and regulations have a role to play in the area.
We will request information from the Scottish Executive on what it is doing on European directives in this area.
Given what I said earlier, we can ask the Scottish Trades Union Congress about the position of workers. I have spoken to it in the past about this issue. Is there a dermatology organisation in existence?
There is the Scottish Dermatological Society, which has a United Kingdom counterpart.
We will contact the Scottish organisation. Are members happy that we write to those organisations?
When we get responses, we will make the petitioners aware of them and continue the dialogue on the subject until we see some progress.
Play Strategy (PE913)
Petition PE913 is from Debbie Scott, on behalf of To Play or Not to Play, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to adopt a play strategy that recognises the right of all children in Scotland to a safe, accessible and challenging play environment.
For the past three years I have been part of a parents group called To Play or Not to Play. We have been trying to find ways to make our area a place where our children can play outside safely and happily. We have noticed that there is a lack of clean, safe and green play spaces in Possilpark and the wider north Glasgow area. Hardly any new spaces have been created, and what spaces there are are not cared for. Since our group was started, we have visited communities and green space projects in West Dunbartonshire and play space schemes in East Dunbartonshire and Edinburgh. We saw there that it is possible to have good-quality play spaces that benefit everybody. The quality of play spaces that local authorities create differs, and a play strategy for Scotland will bring today's spaces up to a higher standard for every child in Scotland.
I am a parent from Provanmill, which is a rundown area of Glasgow. My experiences have been similar to those that Lynn described. Our children cannot go out to play because the only available land is used for fly-tipping. Any available play parks are covered with graffiti and broken glass. It is natural for children to want to play outside their homes, but our children cannot do so safely. That saddens me because I feel that I am not meeting my children's needs and giving them the life experiences that they should have. Access to play spaces should not be a matter of luck; all children should have the right to safe, green spaces wherever they live.
I will add a couple of quick comments to explain why I am here. Barnardo's Scotland and Stepping Stones for Families run a project called the children's inclusion partnership in north Glasgow, and they have supported the To Play or Not to Play parents on this matter for a few years. I came into contact with them through that connection. From our discussions, we realised that Possilpark was a good example of something that is a national problem in Scotland. Since then, we have compiled a comprehensive list of other groups—particularly parents groups—that work in their areas to improve the available play space. Barnardo's Scotland is aware of the physical, mental and socialisation benefits of play for children. We are very much of the opinion that the opportunities for that kind of play are decreasing because roads are being taken over by transport and hostile adults, and a lot of the available green space is being developed. We are worried that Scotland has no national policy to address that and we would like to see some kind of action being taken. That is why we support the petition.
Do members have any comments or questions?
I met Lynn Kelly and others when I visited Possilpark a couple of weeks ago, although I could not get to Provanmill and Blackhill. Will you tell us more about what you do in Possilpark? Have you been successful in getting recognised areas where your kids can play? Do you want to use such areas for organised types of play? Do you want to use the spaces that Donna Stewart told us are currently used for fly-tipping to help kids to understand their environment? I know that you had a project that was receiving funding for a little while and that the kids were very enthusiastic about that and enjoyed it a lot. Will you clarify exactly what it is you are looking for, not just for Possilpark but for Scotland? What project did you have and why is it no longer there?
We are not looking for big play adventure parks. We just want clean, green spaces where the kids can run about. Play parks would be a great bonus, but where I come from, there is nowhere for my kids to run about. There is nothing at all—not one bit of clean, green and safe land. Basically, that is what I am asking for, and I do not think that it is too much.
I got your brochure about the green space that you had created, and plants and—
We never got round to doing that. A bit of land was given to us, but it was taken back. We knew that it would be greened only temporarily but, unfortunately, it has been given to builders. We were never told; the land was just taken back to allow the builders to move in.
So you are saying that you were given a piece of land by Glasgow Housing Association and that the kids and you cleaned it up.
No, we never got that far because we were waiting for a geotech survey to be carried out, but it was not done. As I say, the developers have moved on to the land now.
Would you say that there is plenty of derelict land that you could use in your area as well as in areas such as Provanmill and Blackhill?
There is loads of land. Some of the other girls and I went around Possilpark and mapped about 20 or 25 spaces that were vacant land. Some of them have been built on now. When we started the project, one of the first things that we did was map out vacant spaces; there were quite a few, but they were all earmarked for something so there were very few that we could use.
That highlights a few of the problems with the context in which this group and others are working. First, it is very difficult to find funding to support local projects such as this. The funds that have been made available in England and Wales through the Big Lottery Fund have not been diverted towards play in Scotland; they have been diverted to more general community activities. That is fine, but it means that there is a big hole here where play is being supported elsewhere.
I agree with what you said about the importance of play for exercise as well as for the social, psychological and emotional development of our children. Far from play areas expanding at the moment, there is a big decline in their number. The committee has received petitions about the loss of play areas and playing fields to all sorts of development. I take on board and support what you are trying to do.
Definitely. That sounds good to me.
On the way over here, we were talking about how we used to play when we were kids, and how silly things such as playing with skipping-ropes or kicking a ball about were all types of exercise. If someone mentions exercise to kids, they do not want to do it, but when they are out playing, they are exercising. That puts them in a better mood and their parents can deal with things better when the kids are outside. However, they cannot let their kids out because there is broken glass or fly-tipping in the open spaces. If there were better play spaces, the kids would get the exercise that the Government is pushing for. If kids could play more, they would get more exercise.
That reflects a lot of the discussion that we had at our meeting in Glasgow when we came up with the wording of the petition. There are so many different angles that feed into the problem; traffic is one, stranger danger is another and derelict land is yet another. That is why we had the idea of a play strategy, which is a horrible phrase, but there is no one solution to the problem. We need a package of different solutions that work together across the borders of different policy areas.
In other countries, environments are created outside people's front doors to allow children to go out into the street—I do not know whether such areas exist in the UK, although they might. As Donna Stewart said, it is a matter of turning the clock back to what we used to do. Are you aware of any such measures to keep traffic out of smaller streets so that kids can play safely and be watched by the neighbourhood? Would that help?
No. I have not heard anything about that.
No. I have not heard anything.
National planning policy guidelines are supposed to safeguard open space and green space, but we MSPs have found that, unfortunately, local authorities throughout Scotland ignore those guidelines when that suits them and allow developments that encroach on areas on which we all used to play.
Yes.
Where did you play when you were wee? Are those areas still there? If not, what happened to them?
I was brought up in high-rise flats, underneath which were play facilities—they were supplied with the housing. The situation is the same today. My mum still stays up there. Everything has just been revamped and loads of green grass, swings and chutes have been put in. However, those four blocks of flats and umpteen maisonettes are a wee community in themselves. The facilities there will cater for kids in that area but not for all the kids in Possilpark. When I was growing up, I was fortunate to have somewhere to go to play.
I had much better play areas when I was younger, but I no longer live where I stayed then. I remember being able to go out to a grass park just to play about. There were loads of groups of us who would go out just for a game of rounders. There is no way that my kids will be able to do that, which hurts me a lot. We talk about what we used to do, but my kids will have nothing to talk about, because they will not have done anything in their lives if they do not have somewhere to go to play.
It is surely not too much to ask. As you have said, you are asking not for all-singing, all-dancing play areas, but for space.
As we said, we have seen it done in East and West Dunbartonshire, so we do not see why we cannot have that.
I am sorry for missing your presentation. When I read the committee papers, I had a question. If you have already answered it, I will obtain the information from the clerks afterwards. One document said:
Two sets of lottery money—the Big Lottery Fund and the previous funding—have gone specifically towards play. The interest of Barnardo's in this stems from our being commissioned to distribute much of the money from the first tranche of funding. I think that we distributed £10.5 million, funded 225 projects, and did an evaluation that showed that 80,000 children had benefited as a result. However, that was only in England. In Scotland, the equivalent money went into other pots.
You say that the areas that you experienced when you were growing up are no longer there. What is there now?
Derelict land.
We are not talking about a developer moving in.
Some developers have moved into some bits of land, but one bit of land in particular has lain derelict for 15 or 16 years. People use it for fly-tipping; it is disgusting. It is a great big piece of land that is going to waste. Unfortunately, there is derelict land all over Possilpark, as a lot of Possilpark has been pulled down. Houses have been built on some of it, but there is no green space.
There are two points that occur to me. First, some local authorities insist that a play area be included when a new housing development is built. However, that often becomes an area of contention, because the people who live nearby are disturbed or may not be tolerant of young people playing there, and that causes community problems. That is something that we have to address.
That sounds pretty accurate.
Aye.
John Watson said that many different aspects, including transport, traffic and speed limits, have to be brought together to get safe play areas. The convener mentioned trees, and I must say that, even in later life, I would have played in the trees—
So would I.
If it was safe to do so and if people did not complain.
Have members any ideas on how to take the matter forward? Although I would like to see ideas for treetop football, I do not think we will manage it.
There was a news item on the BBC recently about older people in Finland who were encouraged to use children's play equipment—I think that it was a jungle gym. In time, they reduced the time for completing the course from a minute to 12 seconds and improved their fitness levels. With the advent of that type of thinking, we will get more facilities for younger people. When older people provide it, younger people benefit.
When writing to the Scottish Executive, can we request that it considers a similar idea to the Welsh idea? Although the Executive is not willing to develop a play strategy for now, we could ask it to develop a strategy in future similar to the one agreed at the Welsh Assembly. Did the Executive distribute the moneys from the Big Lottery Fund?
The moneys are distributed by the Big Lottery Fund itself.
We could write to it.
I would like the committee to write to it. If the money is for play, there is no reason why it should not have been designated for play in Scotland. I want to find out who decided that funds should not be designated for play in Scotland.
That would be a worthwhile inquiry.
Kidscape is an organisation that springs to mind. It encourages parents to let their children out to play. I wonder whether we can seek its views on the matter too.
I do not see any problem with that.
Primary Education (Specialist Visiting Teachers) (PE915)
The next petition is PE915, from Anne Mackenzie, on behalf of Hilton primary school, calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to ensure that all primary school children have access, on a regularly timetabled basis, to specialist visiting teachers, especially in music, physical education and art.
Is there any reason for the withdrawal?
No.
It is a shame.
As no indication has been given that the petition will be brought forward on another occasion, unfortunately we cannot consider what I thought would be an interesting petition.
Freemasons (Membership) (PE912)
Our next petition is PE912, which was submitted by Sidney Gallagher. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to commission research into membership of the freemasons by members of the police and judiciary.
I suggest that we note the petition and close our consideration of it.
I hear what the convener says, but there are a few points that I want to raise. We have heard in this morning's news that a raft of new measures on Scottish judges is coming in, which will deal with such matters as whether they are competent. In future, they will be accountable and could, in certain circumstances, lose their position. In my view, that is a missed opportunity. MSPs are required to disclose their membership of and support for other organisations, as well as their allegiances and interests. It is right that that is the case because we can be influenced by such factors. I am certainly influenced by the bodies to which I am affiliated, such as the environmental movement—that is why I am affiliated to them.
I have a great deal of sympathy with what you have said. We have received petitions on the subject in the past. They were passed on to the Justice 2 Committee, which conducted an inquiry. That is why there is nothing more that we can do. The issue has been addressed by the Parliament.
I agree with what Rosie Kane has said, but I think that there is a problem with the petition in that it seems to call on the Executive simply to commission research into membership of the freemasons by members of the police and the judiciary. That would just establish that there are masons in the police and the judiciary. Although it might give an idea of the extent of such membership, it would probably not give an accurate reflection of the situation. That would not take us much further forward; it would simply establish that there were masons in the police and the judiciary. Although I agree with Rosie Kane, I do not think that there is much that we can do with the petition.
It sounds as if a new petition is required.
I agree with what has been said, but there is another issue. The petition focuses on freemasonry, but we all know that there are secret organisations throughout the world. We would be tackling just one part of the problem.
Do members agree to that proposal?
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
Erskine Bridge (Tolls) (PE926)
Our next petition, PE926, from Councillor Sam Mullen, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to remove the tolls from the Erskine bridge at the earliest possible opportunity. Members will recall considering a similar petition, PE869, on 9 December 2005. The committee agreed to invite the Scottish Executive to keep it updated on progress on the review of the future management of Scotland's tolled bridges. Do members agree to couple this petition with PE869 and to make the Scottish Executive aware of it and ask it to get back to us as quickly as it can with the review?
Mobile Telephone Masts<br />(Residential Areas) (PE924)
Our next petition, PE924, from the Cumbernauld masts relocation group, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to ban the siting of 3G—third generation—and terrestrial trunked radio masts in residential areas until all the evidence that suggests that they are a health risk has been examined by the Parliament. The petitioner considers that mobile phone mast radiation is dangerous and proposes a 1-mile exclusion zone around all residential sites.
I am sorry to whinge, but it is regrettable that the petitioner is not speaking to us today. I am sure that there is a raft of reasons for that, but it is regrettable nevertheless because this issue moves on and new information constantly comes in. I always like to hear about such new information from petitioners and we saw this morning how useful it is to hear new information in that way. I have said my piece.
I take on board everything that you say. However, by way of explanation, I should say that, although the petition might relate to new technology, we have already had petitions on TETRA masts, 3G masts, global system for mobile communications railway masts and 2G technology. That—and the fact that the petitioner supplied a considerable amount of written information that members would feel was sufficient to enable them to understand where the petition was coming from—was why I did not think we required to get additional oral information. Further, I thought that it was fairly obvious what we could do with the petition, given that the Planning etc (Scotland) Bill is going through Parliament and that this committee has, on a number of occasions, raised health issues relating to planning that are not currently taken into consideration and has asked the Communities Committee to consider that aspect while it is dealing with that bill. I hope that you understand the reasons for the decision that was made.
I agree. I was involved in the first inquiry that the Transport and the Environment Committee did on this subject. If it taught me anything, it was that we should keep an open mind, because this is a developing area. In the end, we recommended that the Executive adopt the precautionary principle, which it agreed to do. That was an important step forward.
Are members happy that we follow the suggested action?
Next
Current Petitions