---

Civil Aviation Bill

My Lords, if my noble friend will forgive me I am trying to work within fairly strict time limits, and I have an awful lot to cover. I accept what my noble friend Lord Faulkner said that the best way of solving the problem of noise is to reduce the number of aircraft movements and the demand for air travel. I hear his point, which no doubt he will express with great force in Committee. The evidence runs strongly against him. It is not an easy case to argue, and he is not on the winning side at present, although he may anticipate that the balance will change and that our fellow citizens will put such a high priority on improving environments close to airports that they will reduce their demand for air travel. At present, that is as likely as large numbers of our fellow citizens voluntarily giving up their car use. That is happening to a limited degree, but it would be a foolish government that put a great deal of stock by that concept of reduction of opportunity. The noble Baroness, Lady Flather, also emphasised the aspects of noise and night flights, in particular. That is a crucial issue in the Bill, and I hope to discuss those matters with her further. My noble friend Lady McIntosh indicated that I adopted a courteous response to her speeches. I do, but that does not make them any more comfortable to listen to, because she articulates in the strongest possible way the concerns of the people who, in many ways, she represents by serving on the committee regarding Stansted. When she mentioned the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, is chairman of the local authority that is responsible for the beautiful villages in that part of the world, I was not sure whether that was cause and effect. Many of us have known about Uttlesford and such places well in advance of the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, adopting his benign control of Essex, in so far as it proves to be benign. I assure my noble friend that we recognise that a great deal of the debate revolves round Stansted, though not solely. She is well aware of the pressure in other airports. The issue has a particular salience when it is in a part of the world that is green and pleasant. We recognise that we have to convince the neighbourhood of Stansted that its interests will be protected by the way in which we develop the airport facility. We ought not to be too pessimistic. You can increase aircraft movements and reduce noise if there are effective and strong incentives for the industry to produce quieter airports. That has been going on. Aircraft are becoming quieter. Of course, we need to put greater emphasis on that, which is exactly what the Bill does. It emphasises the fact that pressure will be placed on those who pollute the atmosphere, either by emissions or by noise, and they will pay. Therefore, there is an incentive for them to use aircraft that meet high specifications. I am grateful for the remarks made by my noble friend Lord Smith on the opportunities that the Bill gives to airports for which he has considerable responsibility. We always felt that there was unfair discrimination. In recent years, Manchester airport has triumphed over such unfair discrimination and we hope to see that continue with the development of the activities of East Midlands airport. My noble friend Lord Soley never gives support without exacting a price, which is that I should consider carbon neutrality on the ground for airports. That is a most interesting suggestion and a mighty challenging one, as he knows. In some parts of the world it is easier to do that from a new beginning rather than from where we are now. He will recognise just how great a demand that is. In the spirit of friendship, I undertake to consider that. We need to explore that fruitful matter and if we have particular economic activities that present real challenges, no doubt the question should be addressed to them most forcefully. I believe that was the burden of his comments. My note says that I hope I have adequately met the contribution of the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham. I am sure I have not, and she will make that clear in Committee. She will recognise on health issues and on trading emissions that we are making progress; the Bill represents that. On that basis, I hope that she will feel that I have not neglected her contribution to the debate. On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Grand Committee.