§ 2.39 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Report of Lord Brabazon on the relative responsibilities of pilots and aerodrome authorities in relation to landings in bad weather has been received, and whether they have any statement to make upon it.]
271THE MINISTER OF CIVIL AVIATION (LORD PAKENHAM)My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Viscount, Lord Swinton, for giving me an opportunity of making a short statement. The Report of the noble Lord, Lord Brabazon of Tara, has been received and is being published to-day. I can say at once that His Majesty's Government accept in principle the Report, including the main recommendation that the operator, and not the State, should continue to be responsible for laying down weather minima to be observed by the pilots of aircraft in landing at, and taking off from, aerodromes. The Report includes a number of suggestions for detailed safeguards which are receiving intensive study in my Department. The most significant of these is that arrangements should be made for the measurement of "runway visual range." This is a recent concept and has been the subject of experiments at London and Hum Airports. The object is to provide reliable information as to the distances at which a pilot about to land can differentiate between the runway and the strip surrounding it.
I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the noble Lord very sincerely indeed for undertaking this important and highly technical inquiry and completing it so expeditiously and effectively. I need hardly say how valuable it is to His Majesty's Government to receive, on a matter such as this, the advice of the noble Lord, with all his vast experience, and of the distinguished gentlemen who assisted him. He occupies, if I may say so, a unique position in civil aviation, not only in Britain but everywhere, and it is not the first time (nor I should hope will it be the last) when His Majesty's Gov-ernment and I myself as Minister have had reason to be deeply grateful to him.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Lord, Lord Pakenham, for making that statement. We shall all want to study carefully the Report, which I understand will be in our hands to-day. Certainly, no one would want to make any comment until we have had that opportunity. It well may be that at a later stage we shall wish to have, as I think it will be useful to have, a discussion on this matter. Certainly we should all pay close regard to the recommendations which come from the noble Lord, Lord Brabazon of Tara, 272 who has been an amicus curiœ to every Minister, of both Civil and Service aviation. I should like to ask two questions arising from the noble Lord's answer. He says that the main recommendation, which he accepts, is that the operator— which means the operating company, I take it?—
§ VISCOUNT SWINTON—shall be responsible for laying down weather minima to be observed by the pilots of aircraft landing at and taking off from aerodromes. One of the things that has caused us a good deal of anxiety, and must have caused anxiety to the noble Lord himself, is not so much the responsibility placed upon the operating company, but the individual responsibility placed upon the pilot to decide whether or not he is to land. Does the Report deal with the question of responsibility for deciding that an airport should be put out of use at a given time; and does the recommendation exclude from this the Minister responsible for the airports? I apologise if I am taking rather long over a supplementary question, but this matter is so important that I feel the noble Lord would wish to deal with it. The really difficult case is when a pilot comes in to land and visibility is very bad. The pilot, under present rules, on information given by the ground authorities, has to take the individual decision of whether or not to land. I would suggest that there may be times when it would be much better that the authority responsible for the airport should take the decision of saying: "This airport is to be put out of action, and nobody is to land." All I ask is whether that is excluded by the Report and by the noble Lord's acceptance of the principle of the Report. The other matter I should like to raise is whether we could be told (it is possible that this is in the Report) what is the practice in this matter in foreign countries, and particularly in the United States of America, who have, I suppose, much greater experience than anybody else.
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Viscount for his friendly reception of what I have said. However, he places me in some difficulty. I agree with him that it may be desirable to have a full discussion of all these matters, and I am entirely in the hands of the House. As regards the second 273 question that he raised, I can say that in Appendix D a specific account is given of the various weather minima adopted by other States, and the methods in use. Of course, the noble Viscount has received the document only at this moment, and if more information is desired I have no doubt it can be obtained.
I am hesitant about answering the first question asked by the noble Viscount. The noble Lord, Lord Brabazon, has drawn up a carefully balanced Report, and I would suggest, with respect, that the noble Viscount may wish to study that Report in detail before we pursue the matter further. I do not think one could give a clear answer "Yes" or "No" to the question whether the airport is ever to be put out of action by the authorities. Speaking very broadly, the answer is that in that respect the practice would remain close to the present practice. However, safeguards are introduced which are set out in the Report, and I venture to think that the noble Viscount will desire to study those before we go further into the matter.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONI am obliged to the noble Lord.