---

Civil Aviation Bill

My Lords, I have great pleasure in supporting the amendment, which is helpful not only to British interests but to foreign airlines which are affected by the work of terrorists and by the impact of our law on absolute liability. I do not confine my attention solely to British interests, because our law applies to all aircraft and to their owners. For that reason we can recognise that the situation that we envisage is more universal. I suspect that my noble friend Lord Davies was merely laying the ground when we discussed this matter in Grand Committee and he stated the Government’s preference for some form of international agreement. He concluded that the International Civil Aviation Organisation, which was convening a meeting, might revise the 1952 Rome convention—but, as he said, the conclusion to those negotiations would take years. I am not sure that there will be a positive outcome on this issue. We are saying—and I think that the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, would agree—that now is the time that we can do something about the matter, not wait until the conclusion of the ICAO negotiations. It is not as if we have not experienced such situations in this country—only last July, here in London, there was a threat that involved a large number of people being injured as a result of the terrorist attacks. We are not all that far from what happened on 11 September. With this amendment, we can take immediate and sensible steps in relation to the threat. We are able to protect both British and foreign interests. There will be no additional impost affecting the British taxpayer. I repeat: to wait for the outcome of the international deliberations is not acceptable. Therefore, I am prepared to support the amendment. First, it allows the aircraft owner to defend himself in the event of a criminal or terrorist attack from the ground or the air. That is precisely what we were arguing for in Grand Committee and was the subject of my amendment. Secondly, for the aircraft owner the amendment adds a conventional defence, already approved in principle by Parliament, if an aircraft crash resulted from and act of war, hostilities, civil war or insurrection. Thirdly, I understand that the amendment is the preferred choice of leading airline lawyers. But most important, as I said, there is no additional burden on British taxpayers. Of course, this is a complicated issue; it is not something that we can resolve immediately. I hope that this amendment will be withdrawn, but I think that we ought to come back to the issue on Third Reading, because it is of vital concern not only to the British taxpayer, but internationally.