HC Deb 21 July 1982 vol 28 cc379-80
1. Mr. Nicholas Baker

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will review the responsibility of his Department for environmental noise control in regard to microlight aircraft.

The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Giles Shaw)

Responsibility for noise from aircraft, including microlight aircraft, rests with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade, whilst I have an overall interest in all aspects of noise nuisance and specific responsibility for the control of neighbourhood noise under part III of the Control of Pollution Act 1974. The specific exclusion of aircraft from the Act was fully debated during the passage of the Bill. I have reconsidered the matter very carefully, but see no case at the moment for extending the current scope of the Act, which is designed particularly to deal with noise from fixed premises.

Mr. Baker

Is my hon. Friend aware that the noise from microlight aircraft, which are like flying motor cycles, is just as offensive to many people as noise from large aircraft? Will he reconsider the statutory exemptions that are given to that small, but offensive beast?

Mr. Shaw

I am aware that there is considerable public anxiety on this issue. It is primarily a matter for the Department of Trade, which, as my hon. Friend will be aware, deals with many aspects relating to aircraft.

Mr. Sheerman

That is not a satisfactory answer. Is the Minister aware that constituents of mine, who are persecuted by noise from hang gliders with engines, which are much the same as microlight aircraft, can get no answer from the Civil Aviation Authority, or any Government Department, that would give them some peace and rest?

Mr. Shaw

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern. I understand that discussions are going on in the Department of Trade. I have no doubt that in due course my right hon. Friend will take the action that the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Sir Hector Monro

Will my hon. Friend and his hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Trade, who is responsible for aviation matters, be careful not to regulate microlights out of existence? Does he agree that we should encourage people to fly, provided that they do not cause danger or inconvenience through noise?

Mr. Shaw

My hon. Friend is correct. There are legitimate uses for that type of aircraft. He will also be aware of the regulations that apply to piloted aircraft and aircraft that operate out of airfields. I do not see any case for making further adjustments to the noise regulations under the Control of Pollution Act 1974.