§ Mr. Moonmanasked the Secretary of State for Trade what representations were made to him by the United States Civil Aeronautics Board relating to the withdrawal of approval of Mr. F. Laker's Skytrain service.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisNone.
§ Mr. Moonmanasked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will convene a conference of all interested parties in the aircraft charter business to discuss his recent decision to withdraw approval for F. Laker's Skytrain service.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisNo, but my right hon. Friend took account of the charter airlines' interests in his recent civil aviation policy review. My right hon. Friend's decision on Laker Skytrain was debated by the House on 1st August, and there will be a further opportunity for debate when the White Paper is published.
Mr. Tebbittasked the Secretary of State for Trade if, pursuant to the debate on the Consolidated Fund Bill on 1st August, he will now make a further statement about the estimated net loss to the balance of payments if Skytrain were allowed to proceed.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisAs I explained in the debate on the Consolidated Fund (Appropriations) Bill on 1st August, this figure was an estimate of the effect on the balance of payments if the introduction of a Skytrain service by Laker Airways was coupled with a reciprocal service by one United States carrier operating similar capacity. I am satisfied that, within the limitations inherent in any such estimate, the figure is the best that I can give the House; but I regret that I did not make its origin and scope sufficiently clear.
The Civil Aviation Authority estimated, subsequent to its decision in February 1975, that the loss to the balance of payments if two Skytrains were operating would be in the region of £300,000 per annum. However, because this took account only of the revenue earned and main costs incurred, my Department rounded this figure up to £1 million to include the imported fuel and other elements which had been omitted.
530WIn the light of the latest forecasts, Sky-train's contribution to the tourist element of the balance of payments would be negligible or even adverse. However, the precise figure is not of great significance. What is important is the vast difference between these estimates, which show only a minimal effect on the balance of payments, and the estimate of £100 million a year referred to by the hon. Member for Hastings (Mr. Warren) in the course of the debate.