HC Deb 26 October 1999 vol 336 cc800-2
8. Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle)

What steps he is taking to ensure that air traffic control can cope with the forecast increase in flights into and from the United Kingdom. [94218]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Chris Mullin)

The Government are committed to providing the United Kingdom with a safe, modern and efficient air traffic control system for the future. Through our innovative public-private partnership proposals, the Government will introduce a strategic partner to National Air Traffic Services to secure essential core capital investment, which will be about £1 billion in the next 10 years and will be used to maintain existing safety and efficiency levels against predicted traffic increases.

Mr. Prentice

I warmly welcome my hon. Friend to the Dispatch Box; he is an inspired choice. However, he will know that in 1997, the Department forecast that, between now and 2015, aeroplane traffic in and out of the United Kingdom will grow by 4.5 per cent. annually. Given such a momentous increase in air traffic, is it not dicing with death to privatise air traffic control? Have not air traffic controllers repudiated privatisation, as has the airline industry? So far as I can gather, Labour party members also have repudiated privatisation—or did we get it wrong in 1996, when we told the Conservatives that our air was not for sale?

Mr. Mullin

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind remarks. I only hope that I continue to justify his confidence. He was quite right to say that there will be a large increase in air traffic, making it all the more essential that we raise the £1 billion necessary to invest in state of the art technology. His fears about safety are completely unfounded. We are not proposing to put safety in the private sector: safety will remain with the public sector. The one thing that we shall do—it will enhance safety, rather than undermine it—is to separate regulation from operations, as that is not the case now.

Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York)

May I add my congratulations to the Minister on his new position? I also congratulate the Government on their plans to proceed with the public-private partnership for NATS. Following his holding reply to my question last week, when might the Minister be minded to reply to the Select Committee on the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs report on aviation safety? Does the Minister agree that the air safety framework that he has described to the House provides a model that could be followed by the railway sector?

Mr. Mullin

The reply to the Select Committee will be coming shortly.

Mr. George Stevenson (Stoke-on-Trent, South)

May I too welcome my hon. Friend to his position? I recognise entirely the need for investment—there is no question about that—but will he recall the Select Committee's recommendations, which showed concern about the Government's proposals for NATS? The report suggested alternatives which would not only produce the required investment, but would follow proven track records from other parts of the world.

Mr. Mullin

We take what the Select Committee says extremely seriously, and that is why we adopted its proposals on separating safety regulation from operations. We have looked at the other models available, and we are satisfied that the public-private partnership as proposed is the best one. It will give access to the capital that we need, and access to some badly needed private sector project management skills. That is not a small consideration. Finally, it will generate some proceeds which can be invested in other transport projects.

Mr. Shaun Woodward (Witney)

We too welcome the hon. Gentleman to his position, and we are delighted to be reminded by the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) that, before the election, the right hon. Member for Oxford, East (Mr. Smith) proudly declared that our air was not for sale. Although Labour told the country one thing before the election, once in power it does another thing, announcing in July this year that our air will indeed be for sale.

Now that the right hon. Member for Oxford, East is Chief Secretary to the Treasury, will the Government confirm today that it is still their intention to privatise National Air Traffic Services? Is it still the intention of the Labour Government that foreign interests and foreign Governments will be able to buy powerful stakes in Britain's airways, with the purchase of a minority of shares?

Mr. Mullin

No consideration has yet been given to the likely bidders, which will be considered carefully when the bids come in. We are not proposing privatisation of the sort that we saw under the Conservative Government, in which the main public assets were simply looted. We are proposing a genuine partnership that will give us the best of what the private and public sectors have to offer.

Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East)

May I welcome my hon. Friend to the Front Bench? But those who have watched the world cup will realise when someone has been given a suicide pass, as seems to have been given to my hon. Friend with the air traffic control remit. He spoke earlier about private sector project management. Does he share the concern of some who have quizzed those in the private sector who are involved in designing the new system, as there seem to be problems in specifications from the private sector? Is there not concern that the second-line safety—that is, the Prestwick second control centre—now seems to be up for grabs, and may be written out of the system? Can we have an assurance that there will still be a two-centre control system for air traffic control, including Prestwick in Scotland?

Mr. Mullin

Yes, I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. There will be two centres, one of which will be at Prestwick.