§ 11. Mr. Easthamasked the Secretary of State for Industry what spin-off development benefits have been produced from the Concorde project.
§ Mr. Norman LamontThere have been many such developments, reflecting the rigorous conditions under which Concorde operates. In the aerospace industry these have included developments on cabin pressurisation, autopilots, glazing, carbon brakes, tyres, fuel systems and furnishing materials. Of these, glazing and furnishing materials have also found non-aerospace applications.
§ Mr. EasthamAs the research and development cost is in excess of £570 million, which is basically taxpayers' money, will the Minister advise the House what steps are taken by his Department to ensure that some of these benefits come back to the taxpayers rather than go to other countries and competitors in America and Europe?
§ Mr. LamontThe Government do their best to encourage the spread of the latest technologies and have various schemes to sponsor the development of particular technologies. The question ought to be answered by the Labour Opposition, because they, in Government, took decisions on Concorde. It is for them to say whether the technological developments are commensurate with the investment.
§ Mr. AdleyWill my hon. Friend reflect for a moment on the irony of Labour Members asking one minute for public investment and the next minute criticising it, particularly in a project that has brought great credit to this country and provided employment in highly advanced technology? Did I mishear my hon. Friend, or did he mention the Olympus engine in his reply? Does he agree that there is a great deal of spin-off from that? Finally, when considering the Concorde project, will my hon. 581 Friend see that in future the country takes a rather more robust attitude, as the French do, towards promoting our own technological industry?
§ Mr. LamontI agree that Concorde is an outstanding technological achievement. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding us of the Olympus engine, which would not have been developed without Concorde. Decisions on the future of Concorde depend on a number of factors, including the revenues generated by the services of the aircraft already operating under British Airways. I assure my hon. Friend that the Government will do everything that they can to broadcast loud and clear the technological achievements of Concorde.
§ Mr. PenhaligonWill the Minister confirm that one spin-off has been an in-depth study of the effect of sonic booms caused by supersonic flight? Is not the conclusion that supersonic commercial flight means that areas such as Cornwall will be subjected to booms every time such an aeroplane passes overhead? Is that a satisfactory long-term way to live?
§ Mr. LamontI am not sure that I would classify that as a benefit. I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman has represented the conclusion entirely accurately. I shall consider what he said.
§ Mr. Robert AtkinsWould not the spin-offs from Concorde that my hon. Friend listed be enhanced by more jobs and greater profits and a consequent benefit to British industry if the Government helped British Aerospace to take a larger share in the A320 Airbus project?
§ Mr. LamontI know of my hon. Friend's interest in the A320 project and the anxiety and interest of all hon. Members who represent aerospace constituencies. I assure my hon. Friend that we are pressing on with the matter as quickly as possible. To he applied, the technologies that spin off from the development of, for example, Concorde, require an aerospace market and industry.