---

Civil Aviation Bill

The noble Lord is right that airports can give effect to this, but he must know of major road schemes in the country near which householders suffer. The widening of the North Circular—the part I am thinking of is pretty close to Essex, although just within the London boroughs—has led to a number of householders being dispossessed. It is not as easy as that. All sorts of significant developments can produce difficulties for householders. I do not want to detract from the strength of the noble Lord’s argument that airports have a major obligation when it comes to blight. That is why we expect them to reach voluntary agreements in the locality. The noble Lord will have in mind the Stansted position which, he would contend, is not satisfactory for the local residents, and they certainly attest to that. As I said earlier, I am under some inhibition in commenting directly on that situation. I am not seeking to detract from the significance of blight. We can expect the airports authorities to bring forward effective voluntary schemes. The BAA is doing that in relation to Gatwick and Heathrow, with much less controversy than at Stansted. We expect our airports to be able to manage this effectively on a localised basis through voluntary arrangements. If not, they have not been fulfilling their role in relation to the community in the way we envisage they should. We have real problems. The noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, was kind enough to suggest that successive governments have had problems with this, and that is so. It is difficult for me to foresee a government other than a Labour Government for the next half century, but in so far as I can project myself ahead, I can see another government also having trouble with these issues. The noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, referred to the meanness of UK compensation, a point reinforced by the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw. We have examined the position; it is always the case that those who complain do not get what they expect. That is in the nature of the representation. We have not found examples of other states being more generous than us. Someone is bound to know intimately what happens in some part of Sweden, that wonderful model of social democracy. A British Minister is always taken apart the moment he says nowhere else is any better than Britain. I shall give way to any Member of the Committee who gives me such an example. But as far as I know, we have not found that our levels of compensation are meaner than anyone else’s. The argument about meanness is put forward in a subjective rather than an objective way compared with others. There are good intentions behind the amendment. Airports have to face up to their obligations with regard to blight, but I hope that the noble Lord will recognise that I cannot accept his amendment.