§ 29. Mr. John Patonasked the Secretary of State for Air what steps he proposes 2198 to take to lessen the nuisance to the people of Norwich and to teachers and pupils in the schools arising from the manœuvring of aeroplanes over the city.
§ Mr. de FreitasI am sorry for any disturbance that the R.A.F. may be causing to the people of Norwich, but I can assure my hon. Friend that we have reduced to the minimum the amount of flying over the city.
§ Mr. PatonWhile I am grateful for the Minister's sympathy, may I ask if something more could not be done to put an end to this almost intolerable nuisance? Could not St. Faith's be closed and one of the unemployed aerodromes in Norfolk be used, far removed from populated towns?
§ Mr. de FreitasI am sorry to have to tell my hon. Friend that during the last two years we have gone into this point on many occasions. This station was built as a permanent fighter station; it cost a great deal of money, and on strategic and financial grounds we must stay there.
§ Mr. PatonIs it not the fact that this station has been so badly planned that it is only possible for aeroplanes to gain height by flying over the city of Norwich, and is that not a good reason for abandoning it?
§ Mr. de FreitasIt is quite true that the aircraft must fly over the city of Norwich. It is most unfortunate, but this airfield was built in 1937, a great deal of money was spent, and we cannot afford either financially or strategically to move from there.
§ Mr. PrittHas the Minister considered that if there were a war somebody would come along and destroy not merely the aerodrome, but the city as well. Is not that a good reason for moving?
§ Mr. de FreitasThe airfield was sited there by people whose job it is to know the best strategical siting for airfields, and I am content to accept their view.
§ Mr. de FreitasNothing, but, as I have already said, this question has been reexamined several times within the last two years.