§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government how many Service personnel and members of Service families have been killed or injured in trooping flights in (a) 1956, (b) 1957; and whether they will now permit B.O.A.C. and B.E.A. to tender for trooping contracts.]
630§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (LORD MANCROFT)My Lords, in 1956, 51 passengers were killed and 4 injured in accidents to Royal Air Force transport aircraft engaged on trooping or to aircraft on charter to the Air Ministry. In 1957, 61 have been killed and I injured. The policy of Her Majesty's Government has always been that the Corporation should be concerned primarily with the operation of scheduled services and should not maintain aircraft solely for charter operations. This does not prevent them from tendering for ad hoc trooping contracts.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, as I understand the policy to be that the Corporations are not allowed to tender for trooping contracts, would the noble Lord explain what is meant by "ad hoc trooping contracts"? How do ad hoc contracts differ from any other contracts?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, roughly, that form of contract is a short, individual and abnormal journey that does not come in any routine trooping programme.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, is it not time that the Government permitted the Corporations to tender for contracts in competition with individual and independent contractors? What is the reason for this refusal on the part of the Government to permit the Corporations to attempt to contract, if they so desire?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, the reason is that which I have already given; and it is also a reason which was elaborated by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State in the Air Estimates debate in another place a short time ago. I am quite prepared, if the noble Lord wishes, to explain it in much greater detail and to defend and justify the policy of the Government, but, with respect to the noble Lord, I should find it difficult to do this in supplementary answers across the Floor of the House. If the noble Lord cares to put down a Motion on the subject, or, indeed, to raise it when we debate the Air Estimates, I shall do my best to be of service to him.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, may I ask whether any particular aerodrome has been conspicuous in the number of fatal accidents which have taken place? For 631 example, would it be right to say that Blackbushe Aerodrome is a rather bad example?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, I cannot possibly answer that important question without notice. I was not aware of the fact that Blackbushe Aerodrome had a particularly bad record.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, while I am quite willing to debate this matter at some length, if the noble Lord so desires, I should have thought that it was possible for him to give a short answer to the question why the Government do not permit the Corporations to tender. It does not need a debate to answer that; there must be a reason in the Government's mind. Is it that they do not like the continuing success of the Corporations and do not want to encourage them to do more business?
§ LORD MANCROFTNo, my Lords. It is the policy of Her Majesty's Government that the two nationalised airlines should concentrate on the scheduled services. I know that when the noble Lord and his friends were sitting on these Benches a contrary policy was pursued, but I think I am right in saying that, even then, both the nationalised airlines were always beaten on price.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, is it not also a fact that at least one of these lamentable disasters was probably due to sabotage?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, I think the two questions bear out the wisdom of the policy I was begging leave to suggest. We are now getting two totally different matters hopelessly confused, and I think it would be better, if we possibly can, to keep them separate.
§ THE EARL OF LUCANMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government the number of fatal casualties per million passenger-miles flown in Service trooping in each of the last four years.]
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, a record of passenger-miles flown by aircraft on trooping flights is not maintained centrally. I can, however, give the number of passengers carried in aircraft on charter to the Air Ministry and on 632 Transport Command scheduled services in each of the last four financial years: in 1953–54 there were approximately 141,000; in 1954–55 170,000; in 1955–56 155,000; and in 1956–57 143,000.
Figures for passengers carried by Transport Command on ad hoc trooping flights and by overseas transport squadrons moving troops within the Middle East and Far East Commands are not available. Over all these flights, both scheduled and ad hoc, the number of passengers killed was 3 in the financial year 1953–54; 4 in 1954–55; 45 in 1955–56; and 14 in 1956–57. In the two accidents since March 31, that to a Valetta of Middle East Air Force near Akaba resulted in the death of 24 passengers, and that to a Viking on charter to the Air Ministry in the death of 29.
§ THE EARL OF LUCANMy Lords, while I am grateful to the noble Lord for his reply, is he aware that the right honourable gentleman in another place last week said:
Let me say emphatically that the Government completely rejects the suggestion that our trooping policy has, directly or indirectly, endangered life unnecessarily.If that is the attitude of the Government, may I suggest that they start forthwith taking adequate figures by which the respective safety of the two methods of flying, Service and civilian, can be assessed?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, I think it is easy to draw evidence from some of these figures which does not bear out the sentiments the noble Earl has in mind. I quite agree with him as to the need for maintaining the highest possible degree of safety.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord a question that has puzzled me for a long time? As I said on the previous occasion, I would not charge the noble Lord with complacency in this matter; but to what figure has the death roll to amount before this question is treated as something of major importance?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, the whole question of the safety of trooping is, of course, treated as a question of major importance. I think the noble Lord will agree with me that it is impossible to say at what figure any conclusions can possibly be drawn.