HL Deb 25 October 1999 vol 606 cc115-7

(" .—(1) A person who provides air navigation services shall consult the Mayor about the matters specified in subsection (2) below where it is reasonably practicable to do so.

(2) Those matters are—

  1. (a) the proposed alteration by that person of any route used regularly by civil aircraft before arrival at, or after departure from, any aerodrome;
  2. (b) the proposed addition by that person of any route to be so used;
  3. (c) any substantial alteration proposed to be made by that person to procedures used for managing the arrival of civil aircraft at any aerodrome,
where the proposed alteration or addition will have a significant adverse effect on the noise caused by civil aircraft in Greater London.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2) above the reference to a route used regularly by civil aircraft includes a reference to the altitude at which such aircraft regularly fly.

(4) In this section—

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 544G I should like to speak also to Amendment No. 544H. These two additional clauses are designed to implement the commitment in the White Paper that the mayor will have the right to be consulted about any change in departure or arrival routes, or capacity, at airports that may have significant environmental effect, and for his or her views to be taken into account.

Providers of air navigation services will be under a duty to consult the mayor where the carrying out of these services would have a significant adverse effect on noise or vibration caused by civil aircraft in Greater London.

The mayor will be added to those organisations to be consulted by aerodromes which have been designated under Section 35 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. Amendment No. 544G is a clause to introduce a duty on providers of air navigation services to consult the mayor. Amendment No. 544H will amend Section 35 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 to provide the designation by order of any aerodrome to the same effect.

As my noble friend said earlier, clearly the air navigation system is responsible for air movements. The amendments provide the mayor with a means of influencing decisions which relate to the strategy on air traffic over London. I beg to move.

Baroness Hamwee

My Lords, perhaps I should declare an interest, living in west London, directly under the main flight path into Heathrow. However, it is an interest shared by many people who feel disturbed by aircraft noise in that sector of London. I express disappointment that the clause is relatively narrowly drafted. I should have liked to have seen a somewhat tougher provision. At times, the existing noise level is pretty unbearable. People do not feel affected simply by alterations and additions.

As I understand the clause—no doubt the Minister will correct me if I am wrong—the provision is merely a right to be consulted. The mayor has no powers which can be brought to bear. Can the Minister also confirm that the clause does not extend to additional movements on a specific route. The amendment refers to the addition of a route. A reference to "new route" might make the provision easier to understand. However, extra volume of traffic on a route is not covered. I hope that I have misread the amendment. I look forward to the Minister's clarification.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the Government recognise the concerns about aircraft noise across London. We are determined to do whatever is practical to reduce the amount of aircraft-induced noise, in particular from Heathrow. After the phasing out of Chapter II traffic, which will be a major improvement, that becomes more difficult and there are uncertainties. We are doing all we can in relation to that.

However, it would not be appropriate to give the mayor direct powers in this area, as was made clear by a number of noble Lords and myself in Committee. Clearly the managers of Heathrow would need to take seriously the mayor's views as regards the development of Heathrow.

The mayor has the right to be consulted about any changes in departure or arrival routes, or any addition to those routes, and any change to the capacity at the airports. Therefore the mayor has some rights to influence over the volume as well as over the direction of aircraft. But it does not mean that the mayor is a party to decisions on the number of aircraft on a particular route at any given time. However, he has the ability to influence those strategic decisions.

Earl Bathurst

My Lords, is the Minister satisfied that the mayor will have control over the height of aircraft? The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, referred to numbers, as did the Minister. Much of the noise involves the height of aircraft. Has the mayor the chance to regulate at what height aeroplanes come in over which area of London or elsewhere? Height is not mentioned.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, because the mayor has no direct powers in this respect, the answer is no. That is covered by the civil aviation Acts. There are strict regulations. The noble Earl may feel that they are not always observed. Sometimes heights are deceptive. Nevertheless, there are strict regulations over heights under the Civil Aviation Act and the regulations thereunder. It is the responsibility of the Secretary of State and the CAA in that regard.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 544H: After Clause 325, insert the following new clause—