HC Deb 29 April 1958 vol 587 cc325-6
Mr. Amery

I beg to move, in page 14. line 9, to leave out "on land in the vicinity" and to insert: within two miles of any part of the boundary". In the discussion in Committee, the hon. Member for Caernarvon (Mr. G. Roberts) moved an Amendment providing that the distance from an airfield at which the Government might cause objects to be removed should be limited to one mile. We resisted the Amendment on the ground that it might be necessary to remove objects at greater distances than one mile. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air, however, undertook to see whether we could not accept a three or four mile limitation.

We have looked into the whole question very carefully since then, and have been advised that the majority of objects forming obstructions to airfields would not be further than two miles from the boundary of the airfield concerned. We propose, therefore that a two-mile limitation should now be written into the Bill.

Sir F. Soskice

Again, courtesy requires that I should rise to express my thanks to the Minister. We proposed that there should be a limitation of one mile in order to define the scope of the word "vicinity" but, as we said when putting the point in Committee, we certainly were not wedded to the distance of one mile. I should have thought that the distance of two miles which the Minister has chosen would be eminently satisfactory for the purpose we have in mind, which was to seek to introduce more precision into the matter. It certainly does that, and I am very grateful to the Minister.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Amery

I beg to move, in line 23, after "walls", to insert: (other than a wall forming part of a roofed structure)". The word "walls" in line 23, page 14, of the Bill is one of a list of possible objects which might constitute an obstruction to an airfield and which it might be very desirable to move. In the discussion in Committee, fears were expressed that walls may be interpreted to mean a house, a castle or even a cathedral. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air made it plain that what he had in mind were field walls and suchlike, and that the walls of buildings were not intended. He agreed, however, that the wording was insufficiently precise, and the purpose of the Amendment is simply to define more clearly what we mean by "walls."

Sir F. Soskice

My thanks are almost endless this evening, but the Minister, once again, has made a change which certainly pleases us on this side of the House very much indeed. The words he has chosen are completely satisfactory. and I am very grateful to him.

Amendment agreed to.