Civil Aviation: South-East Runway Capacity (Hansard, 17 January 1991)

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, we have acted on the Civil Aviation Authority's advice on the need, in around 2005, for new runway capacity to serve the South East and the identification of airports where its provision may be feasible in air traffic control terms. We have established a working group to examine the wider implications of such development. The group has its first meeting on 1st February. We have initiated also a written consultation to ensure that the group has access to a wide range of views.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Can he give any indication to your Lordships as to when it is likely that a firm decision will be taken? Is he aware of the urgency of the matter because by 2005 British civil aviation undoubtedly will be in great difficulties through lack of adequate facilities in the South East and will lose 1255 traffic to Europe? Can my noble friend give some indication that the Government realise that this is a very urgent and important matter?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I am not able to give any indication of how long the group's work will take. Inevitably that will depend on the progress which it makes. It has a lot to do. We are fully seized of the need to press ahead but we have had to give careful thought to the group's terms of reference and membership and to consider the requests from the various bodies involved. There is no point in starting off on the wrong foot. We should simply lose time later.

§ Lord Whaddon
My Lords, does the noble Lord recall his generous response to my suggestion to him a couple of weeks ago that a representative or spokesman of general aviation should be included on any advisory body regarding a new runway? Has he made such an appointment? Does he not agree that the presence of an informed spokesman is far superior to any written submissions?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, unfortunately it was not possible to accommodate all those who sought places on the group. We were not able to offer individual representation to the general or business aviation community. However, the Business Aircraft Users Association Ltd. and the General Aviation Manufacturers and Traders Association Ltd. have access to the group via their membership of the British Air Transport Association.

§ Lord Underhill
My Lords, as the responses to the public consultation, which I believe closes on 31st May, will be treated as input into the working group, will there be an opportunity for parliamentary or further public consultation on the working group's report, or will that be left to a public inquiry when a project is determined?
Secondly, the Secretary of State made quite clear when he replied to the CAA's original advice that the Government still adhere to the view that there should not be a second runway at either Stansted or Gatwick and that the working group is to consider only the eight sites designated by the CAA. Therefore, could consideration be given to the position of the Marinair project for a Thames Estuary airport? I make it quite clear that I am in no way tied to that project but it seems that that may alleviate some of the environmental problems.

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, in reply to the first of the noble Lord's questions, the report will be published. I am quite certain that there will be ample opportunity for parliamentary input into the findings of that report. It is almost certain that the results of the report will lead on to some form of recommendations for development which will need a public inquiry.
As regards Marinair, for the purposes of the CAA study we ruled out the development of an entirely new South East airport because we believed it to be unrealistic; in other words, a green field site. We were not convinced that there were grounds for regarding 1256 Marinair differently. However, there remains the possibility of something being added later to the working group's remit should proposals emerge which offer a practical way forward.

§ Lord Geddes
My Lords, would my noble friend agree that the purchase by the British Airports Authority of Southampton-Eastleigh Airport, on the one hand, and the recommendations by the CAA in its document CAP570 regarding runway capacity in the South East, on the other, are incompatible?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
No, my Lords. I do not agree with my noble friend's suggestion. The use of the runway at either Southampton or Bournemouth is one of the proposals to be considered by the working party. Regarding the ownership of Southampton Airport, that is not a matter under consideration at the moment. It is true that BAA has run Southampton Airport for some time.

§ Baroness Burton of Coventry
My Lords, is the Minister aware that when the working group was set up there was widespread disappointment among aviation interests, which believed that this was a method of preventing the Government from reaching any decision? Is he further aware that the rate of progress of work as designated by the working group means that it will be several years before we reach any further conclusion? Could the Government give any indication as to whether they intend to take a decision before 2005?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, in the main I answered that question when replying to my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter. The CAA identified the need for an additional runway somewhere in the South East around the year 2005. It is a difficult and sensitive matter to say from where that extra capacity should come. Most people agree that it is necessary but nobody wants it in their own backyard.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, is quite wrong in suggesting that the CAA advice excludes either Gatwick or Stansted? On the contrary, both are dealt with very carefully in the review. Most opinion feels that it is right to complete Gatwick Airport, which was planned as a two-runway airport from its foundation.

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I am not sure that I understood from the question of the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, that he specifically excluded a second runway at either Stansted or Gatwick. As I said, the need for a new runway to serve the South East has been confirmed. We cannot ignore that. Equally, we shall not ignore the environmental and other considerations which led to the views taken in 1985. The terms of reference of the working group are specifically directed to have regard to those views.

§ Lord Tordoff
My Lords, how far is the working group charged with considering the infrastructure on the ground? I am aware that the Chief Whip is indicating that the Statement is ready, but I would be glad if I could complete my question. Is the Minister aware that on the rail link to Stansted, which as yet is 1257 incomplete but shortly to be completed, the cost of a single ticket is to be £8 and at that price many people will find it unattractive to use that airport?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, the latter part of the noble Lord's question strays from the Question on the Order Paper. However, the whole purpose of the working group is to look at the considerations which the Civil Aviation Authority did not look at. The CAA looked at the air traffic control considerations. The purpose of this working group is to look at such matters as environmental considerations, ground infrastructure, access etc.