FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN AERODROMES (Hansard, 19 July 1968)

§ Mr. Corfield

I beg to move Amendment No. 18, in page 9, line 4, after '1965', insert: 'or which have subsequently been transferred'. This is to some extent a probing Amendment. I fail to understand why airports which may in future be transferred to the British Airports Authority should be treated differently in this respect from those that were transferred to the Authority under the 1965 Act. Section 4 of that Act deals with the capital structure of the Authority, and any assets which are handed over to it are regarded as a capital debt. That is the way in which the four aerodromes which were handed over to the Authority by the Act—Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and, I think, Prestwick, although I am not sure whether that is the complete list—were dealt with.

The British Airports Authority was thereafter given borrowing powers to raise money for capital improvements at any of those four aerodomes. If it should happen that another aerodrome is transferred to the Authority—I do not pretend to have any foresight, but let us suppose hypothetically that Luton was selected as the third London Airport and was put under the British Airports Authority—why should not the Authority be left to raise any capital sums which it requires in exactly the same way as it will, presumably, have to raise it to put down, say, a second runway at Gatwick or whatever other improvements it has in mind to its existing airports?

1903 Under the Clause, we seem to have the situation that there is not much difference concerning loans, because in the one case the Authority has borrowing powers and in the Bill there are powers to make a loan for aerodromes which may be transferred later. In the case of grant, it seems peculiar that if, in future, other aerodromes are handed over to the Authority, they will continue to be eligible for grant under Clause 11 but none of the other aerodromes will be.

As I understand it, if a fifth aerodrome is transferred to the Authority, legislation would be required. I do not think that there is any provision in the 1965 Act by which the four aerodromes which were transferred can be added to by order. Irrespective of that, there is bound to be some form of Statutory Instrument.

In future, if other aerodromes are to be added, as undoubtedly they will be, it will almost certainly be necessary to legislate and probably to provide a new financial structure for the Authority if its liabilities increase. With these considerations in mind, I cannot see much point in subsection (2). I cannot follow the reason for the exclusion of airports which may in future be transferred to the British Airports Authority.