---

Civil Aviation Bill

moved Amendment No. 5:"Page 2, line 28, at end insert—" ““(   )   The Secretary of State shall review the maximum noise limits on aircraft taking off from designated airports and shall take account of the target of reducing the perceived external noise of new aircraft by 50 per cent by 2020 compared to 2000, and shall report to Parliament in such manner as he thinks fit at regular intervals.”” The noble Baroness said: Noble Lords are no doubt aware that the aviation industry has published a sustainable aviation policy. One of the key targets of that policy is to reduce perceived external noise by 50 per cent for new aircraft by 2020 relative to their equivalents in 2000. That target has been endorsed by all UK airlines, airports and aircraft manufacturers. It has not, however, been endorsed by Ryanair or other foreign airlines. The purpose of the amendment is twofold: first, it is designed purely and simply to hold the aviation industry accountable to its own target. Secondly, it is designed to help prevent unfair competition from foreign airlines that might otherwise profit from the operation of noisier aircraft. The principal difference between this amendment and the target produced by the sustainable aviation policy is that, whereas the aviation industry target applies only to new aircraft, the maximum noise limits of this amendment apply to all aircraft. This divergence is not overly burdensome; in fact, one would expect older, noisier aircraft to be gradually phased out as new aircraft are introduced, thereby enabling the maximum noise limits to be reduced. We must recognise that variable landing fees are a mechanism, not an outcome. To achieve the desired outcome one needs to stipulate targets, which takes us back to the previous amendment. One of the strongest drivers for introducing Chapter 3 planes was the fact that aircraft manufacturers were given a clear steer that they would have to achieve those targets. This Bill presents the opportunity to give the aviation industry a strong steer to ensure a reduction in the overall envelope of noise and emissions in the future. In addition, if clear targets were set for the reduction of noise it would give people living under flight paths and close to airports certainty and confidence that things were going to improve in the years to come. This amendment is based upon the aspirations of the airlines themselves and merely asks the Government to hold them to account. Moreover, it leaves how much the noise limits can be reduced to the discretion of the Secretary of State. It should therefore be acceptable to the Minister. I beg to move.