§ 14. Mr. A. Royleasked the Minister of Aviation if he will now make inquiries into the long-term possibility of establishing a new London airport near the Thames Estuary to replace Heathrow and Gatwick.
§ Mr. MulleyNo, Sir.
§ Mr. RoyleWould the right hon. Gentleman look at this matter again in view of both the noise aspect and, more important, the inter-line aspect of operating from three major London airports? Would the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the possibility of building a large single airport out in the Thames Estuary to replace Gatwick and Heathrow in 20 years' time?
§ Mr. MulleyI do not think that I should comment on the suitability of the Thames Estuary, because this is one of the matters which was considered by the public inquiry which was recently concluded, the report of which I have yet to receive. On the question of moving Heathrow and Gatwick the hon. Gentleman must recognise that considerable amounts of public money have been involved in these airfields, and I find it difficult to see that it would be economically justifiable to contemplate their replacement.
§ Mr. BostonWould my right hon. Friend bear in mind that his original Answer will give considerable reassurance? Will he keep in mind that the Interdepartmental Committee on a third London Airport revealed considerable objections to an airfield in this area? Will he keep those objections firmly before him?
§ Mr. MulleyMy hon. Friend must understand that while I am awaiting the report of the public inquiry, which went into these matters at great length and in great detail, it would be most improper of me to offer observations on the relative merits of the arguments.
§ Mr. Hugh JenkinsWill my right hon. Friend appreciate that it is necessary to divert some of this noise away from London, in spite of the fact that some of us have constituents who are less sensitive than others?
§ Mr. MulleyI am not sure how far that supplementary question was directed to me. My hon. Friend will know that the reason for building up Gatwick and the consideration being given to a third airport is a desire not to exceed reasonable traffic conditions at Heathrow.
§ 44. Mr. Wellbelovedasked the Minister of Aviation if he has come to a decision on the location of a new London airport.
§ Mr. StonehouseNo, Sir. The public inquiry into the proposal to develop Stansted as the third London Airport ended last Friday, and a decision will only be taken in the light of the report submitted in due course by the inspector.
§ Mr. WellbelovedCan my hon. Friend confirm that the possibility of the location of an airport on the periphery of the south-east border of the Greater London Council area is not being considered?
§ Mr. StonehouseIf any proposal is considered and put forward to the Ministry, that proposal will be subject to the same sort of appeal and investigation procedure as adopted at Stansted.