Proceeding contribution from Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 July 2026. It occurred during Debate on bill on Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [HL].
Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [HL]
I thank the noble Lords, Lord Moylan and Lord Empey, for re-tabling their amendments on airport drop-off charges. I will address them together.
I understand the concerns behind these amendments. Passengers should have clear, accessible information about travel options to and from airports, including drop-off, short-stay parking and free alternatives. The Government expect airports to act transparently and fairly, and reinforces this through regular engagement with the sector. However, these amendments are neither necessary nor proportionate. Most UK airports are privately owned and responsible for managing their roads and parking. Their arrangements are already subject to consumer protection law, competition law and industry standards, with enforcement and redress
where practices are misleading, unfair or non-compliant. There are also established mechanisms to review airport drop-off charges where concerns arise.
The CAA has already examined airport surface access, including competition, consumer issues and the transparency of information on options and charges, and found insufficient evidence to justify a competition or consumer law investigation. Private parking operators are expected to comply with the sector’s code of practice, including requirements on clear signage, accessibility, penalty charge notices and appeals. The Government will continue to expect airports and operators to provide clear, accurate and accessible information before passengers travel. I say to the noble Baroness, Lady O’Loan, that if the information at Belfast City Airport is as unclear as she describes, she has a valid complaint.
Drop-off and parking charges support airports’ wider commercial and operational management. They can reduce congestion, improve traffic flow, support surface access strategies and fund passenger facilities, including cleaner transport options. Restricting them in primary legislation risks shifting other costs to passengers and undermining airports’ ability to manage congestion effectively. Almost all airports that charge for terminal drop-off provide free alternatives, such as shuttles. Airports should ensure that these options are clearly communicated in advance so that passengers can make informed choices. For those reasons, while I understand the noble Lords’ concerns, I ask them not to press their amendments.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 858 cc469-470
- Session
- 2026-27
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Access Disability Children Disclosure of information Compensation Consumers Carers Aviation Air traffic control Air pollution Aircraft Airports Crew Civil Aviation Authority Disability aids Fees and charges Environment protection Fines Economic growth Ministerial powers Powers of entry Protection Public consultation Passengers Noise Standards Allergies Regulation Safety Landing rights Regional airports EGNOS Airspace Trade competitiveness NATS Henry VIII clauses Competition and Markets Authority
- Legislation
- Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill (HL) 2026-27
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-07-14 10:15:21 +0100
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-07-13/26071349000024
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-07-13/26071349000024
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-07-13/26071349000024