§ The Secretary of State for Trade (Mr. John Nott)With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a further statement on the Tenerife air crash.
As the House is aware, the accidents investigation branch of my Department has been actively participating in the Spanish investigation in accordance with established international procedures. These procedures place the formal responsibility for investigating an accident—and the relevant report—in the hands of the country where the tragedy took place.
The AIB team had two full days of meetings with the Spanish commission of investigation last week in Madrid. Following this I am now in a position to inform the House of the statement that has been agreed between the Spanish team and my accident investigation branch. The statement is technical, and I shall read it to the House as it was agreed.
The Dan-Air accident at Tenerife on 25 April 1980—First radio contact with Tenerife Air Traffic Control was made by DA 1008 when it was 14 nautical miles from the VOR/ DME beacon TFN. The flight was then cleared to the FP (radio beacon) via TFN, flight level 110, expect runway 12, no delay. The flight up to this time had been without incident. Some three minutes later it was then instructed to descend and maintain flight level 60.The crew reported overhead beacon TFN some 35 seconds after passing that facility. Air Traffic Control then informed them that the standard holding over FP beacon is inbound heading 150 deg., turn to the left. This indicates an anti-clockwise pattern. This procedure was not published and was not included in the appropriate radio facility charts carried on the aircraft. However, it was accepted by the pilot.The aircraft did not pass over the FP but flew to the south of the beacon calling entering the hold and passing abeam about one minute after the previous transmission. About half a minute later it was cleared to descend to 5,000 feet.Although he had expressed his intention of entering the holding pattern, the commander, for reasons which are not clear, turned the aircraft to the left towards the South-East, into an area of high ground where the sector minimum safe altitude is 14,500 feet.During the descent to 5,000 feet, the ground proximity warning system operated and the 303 crew immediately commenced an overshoot procedure. With high engine power being applied, the aircraft was put into a steep turn to the right, but it struck the mountainside before it had climbed above 5,500 feet.The radio navigational facilities at Tenerife North airport were checked after the accident and were found to have been operating normally. The Spanish commission of inquiry is continuing the investigation into the causes of the accident and will, in due course, produce a report.That is the end of the agreed statement.The House will understand that the statement that I have read does not apportion blame, nor is it the object of an accident investigation so to do. Its sole task is to establish facts and to make such recommendations as it may think fit in order to improve safety.
§ Mr. John SmithI thank the Secretary of State for making an interim report to the House, as he undertook to do. I think that he will appreciate that the agreed statement is full of technicalities, and I am sure that it will be as difficult for other Members, as it is for myself, fully to appreciate its meaning.
It appears that the standard holding pattern requires a turn to the left by the aircraft. At a later stage the statement said :
The commander, for reasons which are not clear, turned the aircraft to the left.Is it the case that the commander of the aircraft did not turn in accordance with the accepted holding pattern? Perhaps the Secretary of State would clarify that point.A matter of greater concern is the fact that the statement says that this holding procedure was not published and was not included in the appropriate radio facility chart carried by the aircraft. Will the Secretary of State comment on that? Will he tell us what steps are being taken to ensure that these charts are carried on aircraft and are made known to the captains of aircraft opera ting in this area? In the light of the fact that many of thousands of British citizens will be travelling through this area in the next few months and indeed are travelling there now—can the Secretary of State say what action he, the Spanish authorities, or any other relevant authorities intend to take in order to ensure that this kind of difficulty does not arise again?
§ Mr. NottThe right hon. Gentleman raised two pertinent points. This is a technical matter, and until the full invesigation report is published I must be very careful about what I say. I hope that the House will understand that.
The right hon. Gentleman is right—the aircraft turned to the left towards the South-East when it should have gone on a North-West heading. It did not turn in the correct direction.
Secondly, the right hon. Gentleman asked about the published data. The information that is required to be provvided by air traffic control either must be provided by publication or by radio telephone transmission. There are a number of items that must be provided in either of these ways. In this case the information was provided by radio telephone. International agreement does not require that this information should be published, but it is true that there is a convention that it is normally so published.
§ Mr. SmithI am sorry to press the Secretary of State, but I asked him what steps were being taken to ensure that this kind of difficulty did not arise again? Did I understand him to say that he was prepared to rely on the convention that these things might be published? Would it not be wiser for him to take steps to ensure that these matters are understood?
§ Mr. NottI understand the right hon. Gentleman's point, but the requirements here are set by international agreement. I have taken his point fully, but at this juncture I can inform him only that the international agreement requires either that the information should be published or that it should be made available to an aircraft by radio telephone, which is what happened in this case. However, I emphasise that I understand his point and have taken full note of it.
§ Mr. ChurchillCan my right hon. Friend confirm that no surveillance radar was available to the air traffic control authorities at Tenerife airport? If that is so, does he agree that that is a grave deficiency in an airport that is used by countless thousands of British and other holidaymakers during the year and that is plagued not only by bad weather but by surrounding high terrain? Does my right hon. Friend further agree that had such surveillance radar been operating 305 the accident could have been avoided, even if the initial instructions from air traffic control had not been properly complied with by the pilot?
§ Mr. NottI repeat the answer that I gave my hon. Friend on 28 April, when I made my first statement. I said then :
There were radio navigation aids at the airport, including a main VHF beacon, and three medium frequency beacons of low power, together with an instrument landing system. There is surveillance radar at Las Palmas covering the whole island, but there is no local radar at the northern airfield. This is not dissimilar to the situation in many airports throughout the world which take scheduled passengers."—[Official Report, 28 April 1980 ; Vol. 983, c. 985.]My hon. Friend asked whether the accident could have been avoided had there been local radar. At this juncture it is impossible to say. My hon. Friend and the House will have to await the full report for such information.
§ Mr. MarksIs the Minister satisfied that aircraft leaving this country from Manchester, London, Luton or elsewhere, whether privately owned, scheduled or chartered, will have charts for the airports that they are flying to over the next months—charts that this aircraft obviously did not have?
§ Mr. NottI believe that I have already answered that question. There is a set of international rules, which I have already described to the House. In the short term there is no way that this Government or any other can change those international rules. I have noted the point made by the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend. I assure them that I shall study the matter and bring it to the attention of those responsible for air safety throughout the world.
§ Mr. WilkinsonCan my right hon. Friend confirm whether the press reports that there is a discrepancy between the Jeppesen manual and the International Air Radio Limited publication "Aerad" with regard to this airport are true? The 727 was carrying only one of those manuals—I do not know which—but can my right hon. Friend confirm that the pilot would in any case have had the correct terminal approach for the runway?
§ Mr. NottI do not pretend to have the technical information required to answer that question. If it is possible 306 and right that I should answer it, I shall let my hon. Friend have an answer in writing.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I propose to call those hon. Members who have been rising, because I know that they all have an interest.
§ Mr. Charles R. MorrisDoes the Secretary of State accept that his statement poses the possibility of pilot error? May I therefore return to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Marks) about the absence of directional radar at Los Rodeos? As the Spanish inquiry into the tragedy proceeds, can the Secretary of State assure us that the safety and interests of British holidaymakers will be put above the interests of charter airlines and travel agencies, and the susceptibilities of the Spanish aviation authorities? Can the right hon. Gentleman give a categorical assurance that Los Rodeos airport is safe for charter flights?
§ Mr. NottOf course it is right that the safety of air passengers is paramount. I understand the strong feelings concerning what I describe as the local radar, but this is an approved airport. It is approved to take British charter and scheduled passengers. There is no local radar at many approved airports in the world that take passengers. I understand the concern, but if we changed the arrangements and denied access to airports, throughout the world, that do not have local radar, there would be a dramatic change in the number of airports that British aircraft could visit.
§ Mr. Alan ClarkWill my right hon. Friend accept that from the statement it is plain that the pilot, having been given a completely unfamiliar holding pattern, did the exact opposite and went into the normal holding pattern? Does he agree that the statement said that that was accepted by the pilot? Is that fact recorded? There is no record of that acceptance in the statement? Does my right hon. Friend further agree that such a deviation would have been immediately apparent on a radar screen, had there been local radar? As Los Rodeos has the highest casualty figures of any airport in the world, would it not be advisable for my right lion. Friend to discriminate between that airport, with those particularly 307 dangerous features, and other airports that he rightly tells the House do not have radar surveillance?
§ Mr. NottThe pilot was told to go into the normal holding pattern for that airport. The airport was not unfamiliar to him. He had flown into it very many times before. It is not my job to apportion blame ; that is a question for the courts and I do not intend to go into that. The pilot was instructed to go into the normal holding pattern. He went into a different heading from the one that is normal. Hon. Members must form their own views. As I told the right hon. Member for Lanarkshire, North (Mr. Smith) when I made my previous statement, I understand that Los Rodeos is a difficult airport. The casualty figures include the tragic accident that took place on the ground, of which everyone is aware. I cannot confirm to my hon. Friend that if that accident on the ground is excluded the casualty figures are as he states. I hope that I have answered his question.
§ Mr. SheermanI accept the difficulties that the Minister now faces, but will he try to put himself into the position of the average constituent, going on holiday with a family? Will he accept that there is a need for speedy assurance now, and not in October, that action is being taken to tighten up any laxity that may exist? For example, will he ask all British operators whether they have severe reservations about any destinations to which they fly? Does he agree that in the short term, informally, through various channels and without too much publicity, he could make sure that standards on the ground are tightened up? Does he agree that that would help to assure people that we shall not have a further disaster this summer, when people would have to ask the House why no action was taken?
§ Mr. NottI assure the hon. Gentleman that I shall bring his comments and those of other hon. Members to the attention of the Civil Aviation Authority, which is expressly required to take care of these highly technical and difficult matters. They cannot be left to politicians. All that I can tell the hon. Gentleman at the moment is that the airport at Tenerife North has the standard facilities of many 308 holiday airports throughout the world. It is an approved airport.
§ Mr. AdleyWe understand my right hon. Friend's difficulties and do not want to make them worse. In his answer to the right hon. Member for Manchester Openshaw (Mr. Morris) he seemed to indicate that there was a price on safety because the cost of installing safety equipment was too great. If that is so, should not civilised nations consider that it is too high a price to pay? My right hon. Friend referred to changed procedures, which were not published and not available in the cockpit. Does he know why the procedures were changed on this occasion? Does it happen frequently? Will he ascertain whether any particular airports or countries are more prone to changing procedures, particularly at busy airports at the height of the holiday season?
§ Mr. NottI do not think that I mentioned price or cost in relation to local radar. It is for the individual country to decide whether there should be local radar. I shall ensure that the CAA, which has responsibility for safety, is fully aware of the concern that, under-derstandably, has been expressed in the House today.
The arrangements were available in the cockpit under one of the procedures—radio-telephone. They were given to the pilot. He was given clear instructions, which he acknowledged. My hon. Friend believes that they should have been published. I have noted his view and that of other hon. Members who have said the same. I do not think that I can go beyond that at present. My hon. Friend is asking for a change in international procedures. I understand that point, but I cannot give an assurance just like that.
§ Mr. Stephen RossCan the Secretary of State confirm that his statement contains all the relevant recorded conversations that took place during the run-in to the airport? Will he ensure that copies of the report—short as it is—go to all pilots who operate on the route, since that might be worth while?
§ Mr. NottI made an interim statement today because I wanted to help the House with any additional information that became available and because of the great 309 tragedy and the great anxiety felt, understandably, in the Manchester area. However, I cannot bypass the correct investigation procedures. It is for the Spanish authorities to publish the formal report. Normally, such a report is not published in less than about a year. As soon as the report is available I am sure that the Spanish authorities will agree to its full publication. They have always done so in the past. At that time the matter will be debated in full.
§ Mr. OnslowWill my right hon. Friend confirm a non-technical point? It seems unfair that the House should press him on technical matters. Is he satisfied that no technical or other information available to the British or Spanish authorities is being withheld or suppressed, or has not been made available to the inquiry? Is he satisfied that the purpose of the inquiry—to find out why the accident happened and to prevent similar accidents in the future—will be fulfilled? Is he satisfied that all the preliminary conclusions that can reasonably be drawn from the available evidence are being drawn, and that everything possible is being done to ensure safe operations in future?
§ Mr. NottI know of no information that is being withheld. So far as I am able, I can give my hon. Friend the assurances for which he asks. The full report will contain additional information. We must await it. I am aware of no information that could be available at this stage which is being withheld by the Spanish authorities.
§ Mr. StottIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that three of my constituents, two of whom were personally known to me, died in the tragedy? I am grateful to him for making an interim statement. He indicated that the Spanish authorities are continuing to investigate the accident and that they will eventually produce a report. When that report is published, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that we can question him in the House on its contents?
The Secretary of State referred to radio facility charts which were not carried on the aircraft. May I press him further? Surely it is not beyond his powers to insist that all British carriers flying into Tenerife have the appropriate frequency charts on board instead of having to rely on radio transmissions 310 from the airport. Will he insist that aircraft carry all appropriate charts?
§ Mr. NottI have noted what the hon. Gentleman says. I shall make some inquiries. If the documents are not published, I shall have to see what can be done. The final report of any aircraft accident, be it international or domestic, entails much painstaking work and is seldom completed in under 12 months. In the past the Spanish authorities have agreed to an English language version of reports being published in the United Kingdom. I believe that that practice will be followed.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether I would make a statement in the House when the final report was available. I do not wish to give a commitment in the form for which the hon. Gentleman asks. Of course the report will be made available to him, his constituents and all who are interested in it. However, it is not normal for every accident investigation report to be made the subject of an oral statement in the House. That would create difficulties. Perhaps we can consider that matter nearer the time. It will be many months before the report is made available, but I understand the hon. Gentleman's point.
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydFor the benefit of the relatives of the unfortunate dead, amongst whom were several of my constituents, can my right hon. Friend confirm that the British accident investigators will continue to keep in the closest possible touch with the Spanish authorities so that they may come to an independent conclusion which might go beyond the facts published in any Spanish statement? Will he further confirm that any conclusions that British investigators may form will be made available to the public?
§ Mr. NottThe gentlemen in the accidents investigation branch of my Department have been working closely with the Spanish authorities. We did the technical work on the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder. It is a complicated process. My officials visited Madrid to work with the Spanish authorities. They will remain in close touch with the investigation. I must make it clear that ultimately the formal responsibility for the report lies with the 311 Spanish authorities. That is the manner in which we have all agreed that the processes should be handled.
§ Dr. M. S. MillerWe accept that the right hon. Gentleman is making an interim report and not apportioning blame, but his statement contains at least one disturbing factor. Does he accept that we are talking of an airport with high mountains near it which does not have surveillance from the ground? Does he agree that when a pilot is not familiar with an airport, or even, as in this case, when an experienced pilot is familiar with it, mistakes can occur? Does he also agree that in such circumstances, when radar cover from the ground is technically possible, it should be made available so that errors can be corrected? Should not a survey be made so that no landings of British aircraft take place at such airports until the matter is resolved?
§ Mr. NottSeveral hon. Members have made the point that they feel that there should have been local surveillance radar at this airport. The consequences for this country of unilaterally deciding not to use any airport where there was not local radar would be substantial. There would be consequences for British scheduled operators and for British tourists. I accept the hon. Gentleman's point ; it is taken on board. I understand his concern—and it is no use my hon. Friends muttering from the Back Benches. I am not an accident investigator, nor would I claim to be a technical expert. This matter is in the hands of technical experts and the Civil Aviation Authority who are charged with safety matters in this country. If the House ever wanted to change that procedure it could do so.
§ Mr. Michael McNair-WilsonWhat evidence has my right hon. Friend that instructions issued by air traffic control are often at variance with the published procedures? Will he be more specific and say whether this is a common feature of this airport's air traffic control system or whether what happened to this aircraft was exceptional?
§ Mr. NottI shall let the hon. Gentleman know whether changes had earlier been made to the holding procedures at this airport. I shall make some inquiries about the matter. I shall inform my hon. Friend whether, to our knowledge, any changes were made. I can only say that in 312 this accident the aircraft was warned and was instructed to go into the standing holding pattern, and, evidently, it did not follow the instructions it was given. That is a factual statement. I do not wish to become involved in opinions on this matter. There are substantial questions of civil liability and other matters involved.
§ Mr. Robert AtkinsI congratulate my right hon. Friend on making a good fist of a technical interim statement. As one of the many hon. Members on both sides of the House who lost constituents in the accident, I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. He has referred to the expression "an approved airport". What does he mean by it? Who approves it?
§ Mr. NottThe expression is that given to any airfield which our own safety authorities have agreed is adequate and properly used by scheduled and charter aircraft.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisThe Secretary of State will be aware that the House has expressed great concern about the possible deficiencies in the application of the international rules and of the appropriate procedures. Can he say whether, since the accident, there has been any change in such procedures, noting the fact that he intends to make representations to the appropriate quarters following any investigation that he undertakes?
Will the right hon. Gentleman comment on the attribution of blame that appears to have been reported in the press on the part of some people in Spain who appear to be in positions of authority? Will he make representations to ensure that the same degree of equity that he has offered to the House today is followed elsewhere before the final report is published?
On the question of the standard facilities at holiday airports, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many hon. Members on both sides of the House have expressed concern about such standard facilities and that pilots, both in this country and internationally, expressed such concern a long time ago? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that there is an overwhelming case for examining, at international level, the adequacy of such standard facilities if only to give reassurance to the many thousands of people who travel to such airports?
313 On the question of a statement, will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that this is not just any accident? This was a major accident. It justifies, in my submission, his coming to the House to make a full statement when the report has been published.
§ Mr. NottI am not aware of any changes in international procedures made since the accident. I will check on the matter. If that is not the correct answer, I shall let the hon. Gentleman know. I do not have any responsibility for, or indeed very much control over, statements made in the press.
There has been considerable concern expressed in the House today about the adequacy of the standard facilities. I have already undertaken to draw it to the attention of the safety authorities in the United Kingdom, and I appreciate fully the points that have been made. I will ensure that that is done.
I note the hon. Gentleman's request that, because the accident was a great tragedy for many hundreds of families, the Government should make an oral statement at the time the full report becomes available. I shall consider that matter nearer the time and let the House know, either by oral or written statement, what we intend to do.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I have received notice of two applications under Standing Order No. 9. I shall call them in the order in which they were made. Mr. Patrick Cormack.