As a member of the Cleveland and Darlington Astronomical Society, I am only too familiar with the continuing deterioration of the night sky because of light pollution. The results in our towns and cities are self-evident, when all but the brightest stars and planets are lost in the glare of un-shielded external lighting. Whilst we all agree that, in the interests of safety and security there needs to be adequate lighting, such public and industrial lights should direct the light to where it is needed—towards the ground, not directly into the sky. This serves no useful purpose and is a source of waste of our energy resources and an extra cost to the taxpayers. Correct and well-designed lighting systems can now be seen occasionally and the requisite laws should be enacted to require that good practice be used universally.

  My answers to your five questions are:

  1.  What has been the Impact? Disastrous. In vast swathes of the country, the ability to see anything less than magnitude 4 with the naked eye is impossible. Serious astronomy is increasingly difficult. The grandeur of the skies has been destroyed. Please just go outside and look. Study the published satellite images of countries at night.

  2.  Are current planning guidelines adequate? Clearly not. If they exist they have failed totally.

  3.  Are they enforced? If they are, they have, in general, failed.

  4.  Is there a measure? An easy test is that the brightness visible by naked eye should be at least magnitude 6. Any astronomer will give a list of stars which should be visible and especially the Milky Way. It is easy to define an acceptable level by this means. Please go outside—now—and see for yourselves. If the hearings were conducted under the open skies it would bring home the problem immediately. Rocket science is not needed.

  5.  Are further controls necessary? Emphatically yes, particularly on public lighting. Street lighting is a major source of pollution. They can easily be designed to direct the light to where it is needed and nowhere else. They should be switched down from midnight to dawn (as in County Durham). Flood lighting of public and other buildings is another source of serious pollution, where the light is deliberately directed upwards. This should be banned outright. Laser light displays for advertising should be subject to strict control. All these measures are a contribution to energy saving. Ask the questions "How much energy is wasted for external lighting?" and "How much renewable energy is being installed?" Unless public lighting schemes are controlled, they will be about equal. In that case, installing renewable energy is a waste of time.

  As an individual, I:

—  Applaud the work of the Select Committee in tackling this scourge of Astronomy.

—  Rely on you to reduce the burgeoning and ever-increasing pollution, which is ruining the enjoyment and the science of Astronomy in this country.

—  Ask you to recommend that Local Authorities and Government pass anti-pollution legislation, not just guidelines and good practice for self-regulation, which has failed. The Czech Republic has done it, so can we.

—  Urge you to ask the British Standards Institute to draw up and publish a BSS for a standard on the design of External Lighting—street lights, flood lighting, security lighting—to eliminate the upward direction of the light.

—  Urge you to draw up, as a matter of urgency, "National Parks and Protected Dark Areas for Astronomy" to preserve the few remaining areas with dark skies from the encroachment of pollution.

—  Ask you to encourage schools to study this problem as School Projects, so that children become aware of this serious destruction of their inheritance. Show them what they are missing.

—  Urge you to ask the BBC and other broadcasting companies to take up the cause and demonstrate the problem to all.

—  Ask you to include in your remit problems of radio wave pollution, which is having a devastating effect on Radio Astronomy.

April 2003