Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bradshaw (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 8 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Civil Aviation Bill.


Civil Aviation Bill

I support what the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, has said. I declare a non-interest in that to my knowledge I have never set foot in the county of Essex, so I do not speak for the residents who are affected by the particular claims of Stansted, but neither is the clause we are talking about. However, the fact is that when large infrastructure works are provided in this country, the habit of this country is to be extremely mean and late with compensation. That always creates resistance wherever anything is proposed. It is interesting to contrast the experience in this country with that in France, where a declaration of public interest where a new utility of some sort is to be provided is usually accompanied by much more generous compensation very much earlier, which encounters less resistance from the people involved. So I support warmly the sentiments in the amendment proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield. While I do not expect the Minister to be immediately generous in his reply, we can always hope, even at this stage of a rather long day in Committee.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c158GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Complaints Compensation Detainees Arrests Aviation Air pollution Buildings Competition Airports Air routes British Transport Police Damage Airlines Health Fees and charges Liability Environment Households Insurance Insulation Exhaust emissions Police Management Monitoring Passengers Noise Security Safety Tour operators London airports Air Travel Trust Countries
Legislation
Civil Aviation Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk