§ 32. Mr. John Grimstonasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation on what date an application was made by a subsidiary company of the Railway Executive to operate a service from Shoreham to Deauville as an associate of British European Airways Corporation; on what date the associate-ship was granted; and on what date the company informed his Department of its decision not to operate the service.
§ Mr. BeswickAn application was made to the Air Transport Advisory Council by 011ey Air Services, Limited, on 30th October, 1950. After clearance with the French Government, the company were informed on 24th February, 1951, that my noble Friend had granted provisional approval, but on 18th May the company informed the Council that they had decided not to operate the service.
§ Mr. George WardCan the hon. Gentleman say what Section of the Transport Act it is which empowers the Railway Executive to operate an air service at all?
§ Mr. BeswickI am not answering a Question about that. I am answering a Question about Olley Air Services.
§ 33. Mr. J. Grimstonasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation on what date an application was made by Island Air Services (London), Limited, to operate a service from Shoreham to Deauville as an associate of British European Airways Corporation; on what date and on what grounds permission was refused; what the circumstances were which led to a reversal of this decision and an invitation to the company to operate the service; and when this invitation was made.
§ Mr. BeswickThe application was made to the Air Transport Advisory Council on 8th October, 1950. It was rejected on 8th December by my noble Friend on the recommendation of the Council. Subsequently Olley Air Services, whose application had been approved, withdrew, and Island Air Services were informed on 29th May, 1951, that the Minister was prepared to accept their application.
§ Mr. GrimstonIs it not sensible and fair, where a company has successfully 2307 operated a 100 per cent. service without subsidies, from the Government, to allow the agreement to be extended?
§ Mr. BeswickIf there are two applications the Council takes everything into consideration, which it did, and on this occasion it recommended that the application of the second company should be accepted.
§ Mr. G. WardShould there not be some appeal tribunal to which people can go if applications are turned down without any reason being given?
§ Mr. BeswickThe original idea was that this Advisory Council should be independent, and, in a sense, an appeal tribunal. It would, of course, have been possible to have had the initial applications made to the Minister.
§ Mr. GrimstonSurely if an associate agreement arrangement is made and a company has made a success of the service it should be allowed to carry on?
§ Mr. BeswickOther things being equal, I agree; but there was a good deal of evidence before the Air Transport Advisory Council, and it came to the conclusion that a more successful service to the public was more likely to be offered by the company whose application it recommended.
§ Mr. GrimstonWill the hon. Gentleman say what successful service is better than 100 per cent.?
§ Mr. BeswickA 100 per cent. service that is not improperly marred by other things. [Laughter.]
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydWill the evidence to which the hon. Gentleman has referred before the Air Transport Advisory Council be published?
§ Mr. BeswickNo, Sir, it is not the usual practice to publish the detailed evidence. I think it would be unfair. Since the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. G. Ward) seems to think my previous reply so funny—
§ Mr. KirkwoodGive the children a chance.
§ Mr. ManuelLet them put up their hands.
§ Mr. Beswick—I will explain to him that there are, of course, factors on the ground which affect the operation of the company, as well as the services which the company may operate 100 per cent. efficiently in the air.