HC Deb 08 December 1966 vol 737 cc1556-9
22. Mr. Hunt

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he has had with foreign Governments about aircraft noise.

Mr. Mason

Her Majesty's Government convened an International Conference in London last month on the reduction of noise and disturbance caused by civil aircraft. Representatives of 26 Commonwealth and foreign Governments attended.

Mr. Hunt

Can the hon. Member say what were the practical results of that conference? What has been decided?

Mr. Mason

The conference achieved far more than we had hoped. Flowing from it there will be a published report. The two main things agreed were that there should be serious consideration of a noise certification to be attached to the certificate of airworthiness, and, secondly, the consideration of steeper glide paths over airports. Both questions are subject to much consultation, particularly with the pilots' organisations.

Mr. Rankin

Does this mean that we are going to control the noise made by civil aircraft while allowing military aircraft to make as much noise as they like?

Mr. Mason

Perhaps my hon. Friend will address that question to the Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Royal Air Force.

24. Mr. A. Royle

asked the President of the Board of Trade, following the International Noise Conference, whether he will propose to other countries which manufacture aircraft a convention on maximum permitted noise emitted by aircraft engines whilst landing or taking off.

Mr. Mason

The conference showed that there are good prospects for a scheme on the lines my right hon. Friend mentioned in the aviation debate on 21st November, and I hope to make a full statement to the House on what we propose before long. We shall certainly keep in close touch with other aircraft manufacturing countries.

Mr. Royle

What detailed proposals has the Minister of State to offer concerning approach noise? Is he aware that the scheme for soundproofing proposed by the Prime Minister in a speech before the election of 1964 has proved a complete failure? With what is he intending to replace the Prime Minister's gimmick?

Mr. Mason

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman, who takes a great interest in this topic, should denigrate the measures that we are taking to obviate this nuisance, none of which measures his Government took when in office.

Mr. Ryan

Does my hon. Friend recognise that among residents in the areas around the airport there is considerable pleasure as a result of this scheme, which the Prime Minister had started after the election? Does he recognise, however, that the only way to stop noise is at source, and that the soundproofing scheme is an inadequate substitute for the measures that he is proposing?

Mr. Mason

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for those comments. That is precisely what we are doing. We are making serious attempts to tackle this problem at source, which means in the production of aero-engines.

Mr. Royle

In view of the thoroughly unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

26. Mr. Worsley

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the need to restrict nuisance caused by noise, if he will direct the Airports Authority to use runways others than those running east-west at Heathrow.

Mr. Mason

Only the east-west runways are long enough—and have the necessary aids—to permit the large jet aircraft using Heathrow to carry out regularly all types of operations without extremely severe restrictions on the load they can carry. To bring the other runways up to similar standards would be very costly and large numbers of people would still be disturbed by aircraft noise.

Mr. Worsley

Will the Minister look at this problem a little more seriously? He has said that there is no serious problem of noise in central London. That is not true. Will he consider, first, whether these runways could be lengthened, with the necessary aid being provided? This would make a real improvement in the situation?

Mr. Mason

The hon. Gentleman must not take my words out of context. The problem is relative. Over central London is is not as bad as it is over the airport. Secondly, if steps were taken to extend the runways many other people would be affected by noise, and it would be a very costly operation. We do not think that it is necessary at this time.

Mr. Marten

If any proposal is made for steeper glide paths will the Minister give an absolute assurance that far more important than noise to any constituents in any constituency is the factor of the safety of aircraft and their passengers?

Mr. Mason

The hon. Gentleman is right. No steps would be taken to increase the glide path unless we had fully consulted the British Airline Pilots' Association, which would be very concerned with the question of safety.