Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

While I welcome the Minister of State and support the Government motion, I commend Fine Gael for putting down the topic for discussion as it is a matter of concern throughout the country. I agree in particular with the previous speaker and with all of the points made by Senator Dooley.

Mobile telephones are of enormous benefit to individuals, families and the economy. In a Third World context, we heard about the benefit they are to continents such as Africa. None of that is in dispute and given the current state of technology we probably need masts. Perhaps as Senator O'Toole suggested, the problem will disappear as technology advances.

I agree with the conclusions with the World Health Organisation. In the majority of cases, no health effects occur. However, the precautionary principle applies regarding location. I would be only secondarily concerned with matters such as aesthetics and property prices, which I do not believe to be key issues. However, there is evidence that a few individuals are hypersensitive to radiation and there certainly will be doctors who would provide evidence in writing of the effects that a few individuals appear to be suffering.

A well known case is that of a Tipperary farmer, John Ryan, who has received much publicity in the national media. I admit that every time I pass the mast site, which is perhaps one mile from the Tipperary to Cashel road, my mobile telephone lights up in a way it does not do anywhere else on the journey, which suggests there are pretty powerful signals in the vicinity. My concern is that the agreement with the farmer was totally unbalanced. Vodafone, the company concerned, had the option of getting out of the agreement within one year if that was in its interests, or if the mast was in some way ineffective, but the farmer was forced to live with the mast for several years. It scarcely would have been in his or his family's financial interest to object to the mast given that quite significant sums are paid each year to farmers.

As legislators, we must take into account the very real possibility, or even likelihood, that there will be an impact on a few hypersensitive individuals. We must create a regime that caters for such an eventuality and that perhaps in extremis allows a mast to be relocated.

Senator O'Toole referred to the many different types of technology. There is undoubtedly a question of adjustment and of people's need to get used to technology. We must bring the public with us and I am not sure dismissing all fears as groundless is necessarily the right way to proceed given it is difficult to know for certain whether this is the case. My view is that the effect of masts on most people is minimal and not damaging to health but we must apply the precautionary principle. We need to cater for individual cases of hypersensitivity and should not pretend such cases do not exist.