John Whelan (Labour)

I thank the Minister of State for taking time out from his busy schedule to come to the House to discuss this matter. Contrary to Senator Mark Daly's view, to be fair, he has done good work on this issue, which I want to acknowledge.

The motion has merit in its own right. It is important that the Fine Gael group has brought it forward in a week when we have debated the Public Health (Tobacco) (Amendment) Bill in the House. We have seen what corporations do if they are allowed to get away with something and we have seen the effects of light touch regulation in this country to the maximum effect. Therefore, it can be categorically stated one cannot trust large companies which are profit driven and will not necessarily put the best interests of the community at large first. We saw this with the companies involved in the tobacco sector, in which, as Senator Mark Daly correctly pointed out, information had to be dragged from and beaten out of them. It took brave whistleblowers to eventually expose what was going on, namely, that they had known all the time and had the information in their possession. Senator Pat O'Neill's motion is of benefit in that such a law would compel companies to make available the level of information they have available on the possible dangers associated with the overuse of mobile phones.

I want to broaden the discussion to include transmitter masts and base stations. The Minister of State's Department has taken the initiative in the matter of high voltage power lines to appoint an expert group to report back to the Government by October on the benefits or otherwise of burying such cables underground.

At times in the public debate there has been a great deal of misinformation and mythology. Scaremongering does nothing to help the constructive nature of the debate. I agree that adopting a precautionary approach is advisable and vital. On the back of Senator Pat O'Neill's motion, it would be advisable to adopt best international practice in terms of the location of pylons, transmission masts, substations and, to extend the discussion, high voltage power cables which should not be in close proximity to dwellings, where possible. All this would take is some goodwill and common sense. With regard to hospitals, schools and playgrounds, as Senator Mark Daly said, what would be wrong with taking the best precautions?

It is a bit rich for politicians to talk about the overuse of mobile phones when everyone here seems to have one welded to his or her jaw. Having taken part in the debate, I intend to review my own conduct in that regard. One can either have a mobile phone at one's ear or strapped to the waist, which is not wise if we take it there are possible carcinogenic dangers. To be fair, the World Health Organization stated there were "possible" risks and attached the same possible carcinogenic outcomes to coffee and petrol. It is important, therefore, that we put the matter in context.

As one travels around the country at Holy Communion time, one will see children two hands higher than a duck with a mobile phone. While I know parents mean well, it is questionable whether this is wise, given the potential dangers, as Senator Mark Daly pointed out and on which Senator Pat O'Neill wants further information. I ask parents to consider the merits and weigh the pros and cons of giving children mobile phones in their formative years when it exposes them to potential health dangers.