Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 5 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Civil Aviation Bill.


Civil Aviation Bill

I am grateful to the noble Lord for the way in which he moved his amendment. Section 78 does not provide for aerodromes to impose financial penalties on aircraft operators for breach of noise requirements set out under that section. The only sanction that has been available is to withhold entirely airport facilities from that operator, but that is a draconian penalty that has never been used. The clause inserts into the 1982 Act new Sections 78A and 78B. The noble Lord asks why the scheme is discretionary. Well, I can tell the Committee who is the best person to inform him why that is necessary—that is, his noble friend sitting right alongside him, the noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie. The noble Earl will know that non-designated airports are in places such as Barra. Are we proposing to make the scheme mandatory on Barra? We are not—and that is why the scheme is discretionary and not compulsory.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c97GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Appeals Aviation Air pollution Competition Aircraft Airports Airlines Fees and charges Liability Fines Insurance Exhaust emissions Heathrow Airport Powers Management Pollution control Monitoring Noise Night flying Terrorism Sustainable development Stansted Airport Gatwick Airport
Legislation
Civil Aviation Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk