§ 2.49 p.m.
§ The Earl of KINNOULL: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
1613§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the recent decision announced in America to adopt internationally the American landing system at airports is binding on the United Kingdom and European airports in view of the technical doubts about which system to adopt; and whether information as to names of the countries voting and which way they voted is available.
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, the Question refers to a recommendation by the International Civil Aviation Organisation's All Weather Operations Division meeting last week in Montreal. It was that a new precision approach and landing guidance system for the world's airports should be based on a time-referenced scanning beam or TRSB system. This system has been developed by the United States. The United Kingdom has consistently supported the Doppler Microwave Landing System or DMLS, which we believe is infinitely superior. The decision is subject to ratification by the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The decision is not binding on member States, but the interests of international civil aviation will be best served by the universal adoption of an internationally agreed system. The decision was taken by secret ballot.
§ The Earl of KINNOULLMy Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that fairly full reply and while I am sure that the House shares her disappointment that the American system was adopted, may I ask whether she could say if that system is now fully developed and tested?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, my information is that the American system consists of several experiments. There now has to be a further period of experiment and research over future years in order to adapt this system to the one which is to be used. It is not anticipated that the new system will come into force before 1995, and it is hoped that the British industry will be playing quite a big part in the development of the system. At this point it is the principle of the system which has been agreed.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, can the noble Baroness tell 1614 us whether she has any information as to who managed this rather surprising vote on behalf of the Americans, and also whether she has any information as to whether it was Lackheeds who masterminded, from the American point of view, this highly successful operation?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I have no information, other than that 39 countries voted for, 24 countries voted against, while there were eight abstentions. Therefore it was not a close result, although for the United Kingdom it was a disappointing one.
§ The Earl of KINNOULLMy Lords, if the American equipment is still experimental, which is the word which the noble Baroness used, was not the decision taken a little early, in view of its importance?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I understand that tests were carried out in the full knowledge and in the sight of all of the countries who were concerned with it, and that they were satisfied when they took their vote after their long discussions. They were very long discussions and I guess that at times they were perhaps acrimonious. The decision has now been made and it will be ratified, or otherwise, when the full committee meets.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, perhaps it is an embarrassing question to ask the Government, but is the noble Baroness aware that a great number of people are extremely concerned about the methods which American industry sometimes uses to obtain orders? Are the Government altogether satisfied that the methods employed by the American industry were such as would not merit investigation?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, a Congressional sub-committee inquired into the conduct of the debate. It is not for me to comment upon whether another country's ways of doing things are proper. All I can say is that, so far as the United Kingdom is concerned, we carried out everything in the proper way. We hoped to influence all of the other countries, but we were unsuccessful.
§ Lord BOYD-CARPENTERMy Lords, can the noble Baroness confirm that the wholly objective advice of the technical experts which was available to Her Majesty's Government clearly indicates that the Doppler system is technically superior? In those circumstances, can one be wholly free of the suspicion that economic and industrial considerations rather than a completely single-minded desire to provide the world with the best system affected the decision of the technical committee?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I think it is safe to say that, so far as this country is concerned, all of our technical advice pointed to the view that ours was the best system. We do not deviate from that opinion now. However, the fact remains that the TRSB, the American system, was the one which gained support at the meeting.
§ Lord WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, in view of the fact that this system will not be introduced for a period of at least 15 years, may I ask my noble friend whether or not it is extraordinary that a decision should be reached at a time when it is not possible to say which will prove to be the best system? Therefore, would it not be sensible for the matter to be kept open? Is it possible for Her Majesty's Government to do something to ensure that the matter remains open until the systems have been fully tested?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, all that the decision has done is to determine the type of system which will be used. In fairness to all of the airports, we have to give a time during which they know that their present system will still be able to be worked and be used. We cannot leave them in a state of chaos. Therefore 1995 has been fixed as the date by which we hope that the new system will be introduced. Having fixed the type of system there will be, we are satisfied that the world's electronic industries will be competing for the manufacture and installation of the equipment. Because of the record of the British electronics industry, I have no doubt that we shall look forward to gaining quite considerable contracts when that development goes ahead.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, I sympathise with the noble Baroness on 1616 this Question, but could she tell the House how a technical judgment can be made between a system which is developed and a system which is not?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I think that the United States would claim that their system is developed, although it has been developed in parts instead of as a whole. It is now a question of amalgamating the parts into one whole. There were long discussions about it in meetings, and the vote was taken. We lost that vote and we just have to accept it.
The Earl of SELKIRKMy Lords, can the noble Baroness say whether the members of the enlarged European Community presented a united front on this matter?
§ Baroness STEDMANNo, my Lords; it was not possible to mount a united European policy because we were not the only EEC country which sought permission and approval for a system to be developed.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, since there is considerable evidence of American corporation pressure being used to bring about this result, may I ask the Minister whether it is possible to publish in the Official Report the names of those Governments which supported the majority view, those which opposed and those which abstained?
§ Baroness STEDMANNo, my Lords; as I said earlier, there was a secret ballot. While I accept that it was a robust contest —that is perhaps the easiest way to describe it—there were many controversial features in the debate, including the use of computer simulations which were not fully validated against the system which we were proposing. However, the final decision was taken on a secret ballot in order to ensure a free vote. I hope that with our democtatic system we can accept a secret ballot.
§ Lord HARMAR-NICHOLLSMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware, secret vote or no secret vote, that this is another case where it pays to be considered to be a significant Power, and that the sooner this country becomes significant again in political terms it will reflect some advantage on our industry and our general technical development?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I would not accept that argument. The system which we put forward was at a much more advanced stage than was the American development that was put forward. We owe a considerable debt to our electronics industry for the way in which they have proceeded. Regrettably the vote went against us. We cannot win all the time, much as we should like to do so.
§ Baroness LLEWELYN-DAVIES of HASTOEMy Lords, we have an enormous programme in front of us, and I am about to announce that there is to be a Statement as well. Feeling runs very high on this subject, understandably, but we had better leave it now.