| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Highlands and Islands
Q6. Mr. Charles Kennedy: To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to pay an official visit to the highlands and islands. [11403]
The Prime Minister: I have at present no plans to do so.
Mr. Kennedy: That being the case, may I invite the Prime Minister to take this opportunity to explain to local people a glaring inconsistency that emerged over the weekend and that they have difficulty comprehending? Why is it that, on a £60 million contract, public money is ruled in and private finance is completely ruled out; yet, on a contract of half that value and one that is fundamental to the interests of the people of the west coast of the highlands, the Isle of Skye and, indeed, the Western Isles constituency, which is one of the lowest-income parts of the country, the public sector is completely ruled out, private finance imposed and people now face the highest toll bridge charges, not only in Europe but probably in the world, for a future generation?
The Prime Minister: The reality is that tolls on the Skye bridge are going to be no higher than ferry fares in 1995. Without the private finance initiative project, Skye would not have had the bridge for another 20 years. I note that the Liberal Democrats are opposed to using private finance. I hope that, in all the constituencies up and down the country where private finance is providing better facilities, it will be clear that the Liberal Democrats oppose those projects.
28 Jan 1997 : Column 151
28 Jan 1997 : Column 153
Media Comment (Madam Speaker's Statement)
3.30 pm
Madam Speaker: I have a statement to make arising from the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) last Thursday. He contended that some parts of recent media comment on the conduct of Members gravely reflected on the good name of the House as a whole. As I hinted last Thursday, the hon. Member's remarks struck a chord with me. It is my impression that damaging comments--often highly generalised--have been common in newspapers, television and radio programmes, books and even learned articles. I believe that I owe it to the House to make some considered points of my own.
In my statement to the House on 14 October last, I said that I strongly believed that the matters under investigation should be resolved as soon as possible. Since then, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, with the enhanced resources with which he was speedily provided, as well as the Committee on Standards and Privileges, have been hard at work--work that is enormously time-consuming and painstaking--investigating the matters which stand referred to them. With the reputations of individual Members and others at stake, these investigations cannot be unduly hurried, but I repeat my view that they should be concluded at the earliest possible moment.
I should stress also that the Commissioner and the Committee are carrying out this quasi-judicial work under new arrangements which are little more than a year old. It is deplorable that many sections of the media have drawn only scant attention to the fact that, following the original work of Lord Nolan's committee, the House has made many far-reaching changes to its rules and mechanisms. The House as a whole, and I as its Speaker, are determined that these new arrangements should work effectively.
28 Jan 1997 : Column 154
It should be noted that the first Nolan report stated:
There can be no complaint about the role of the media in identifying cases where it appears that Members have fallen short of those standards. Indeed, in so doing, the media perform a public service. But it is reasonable to expect that the media do not repeat and pursue allegations in a way that prejudges their validity pending the outcome of investigations by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, to whom any new genuinely new evidence should be sent. Above all, they should not use individual allegations as the occasion for making highly generalised and unsubstantiated comments against Members of this House as a whole and against our parliamentary system.
The Nolan committee's first report also stated:
I am determined that the new procedures and rules that the House has established should work in such a way as to bolster our democratic system. The media can play their part with fairer and better balanced coverage and comment. I also look to hon. Members in all parts of the House for constructive support for this historic institution to which our constituents have sent us, and which all of us have the honour to serve.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
Thank you for your statement, Madam Speaker.
28 Jan 1997 : Column 155
Mr. Jim Cunningham (Coventry, South-East):
I beg to move,
Governments across Europe are concerned about the effects of noise pollution. Aircraft landings and take-offs cause the greatest amount of noise--and at some airports there are landings every two to three minutes. The impact of aircraft engine emissions on the environment and on health should not be underestimated. Many residents complain of ill health, which they attribute to living near an airport or under a flight path. The disturbance to residents caused by night-time flying is well documented. Night-time flying is one of the most obvious causes of noise pollution--many hon. Members receive regular correspondence on that subject--and can cause a great deal of disturbance and inconvenience to sleeping residents.
This Bill enables the Civil Aviation Authority to carry out research into, first, the use of hushkits; and, secondly, technology, including aircraft computers and so on. As well as examining ways of making hushkits more effective, it is important to conduct research into alternative forms of noise reduction.
In order to enable older aircraft to meet the chapter 2 standards, it was necessary to fit them with engine mufflers known as hushkits. They are relatively inexpensive, but they do not reduce the level of chemical emissions from aircraft engines. There is also a growing feeling in aviation that hushkits will not, by themselves, produce a satisfactory reduction in noise pollution.
Many aircraft that are currently classed as chapter 2 will be upgraded to chapter 3 by fitting them with hushkits. Unfortunately, many of the hushkits will provide
28 Jan 1997 : Column 156
Luton airport is currently developing a new computer system for aircraft that will enable pilots to monitor the level and direction of an aircraft's noise emissions, and allow them to alter the flight path so as to reduce the impact on residential areas.
Some companies replace old engines with modern ones which not only reduce noise pollution more effectively, but cut the amount of chemicals emitted. However, the fitting of new engines is more costly, and many companies prefer to use the cheaper hushkits. There is a significant difference between the level of emissions produced by planes that simply have hushkits fitted, and planes that have new engines. That has been acknowledged by the Civil Aviation Authority and the Department of Transport.
The Bill has two aims: first, to raise the basic level of chapter 3 standards, and secondly, to encourage new research to be carried out by the CAA and the Department of Transport into ways of reducing noise pollution.
It must be stressed that the Bill is a short-term measure only, designed to alleviate some of the problems that residents living near Britain's small airports face day and night from older aircraft with poor noise pollution controls. It is not and should not be a substitute for a Government Bill to deal with the problems of noise pollution around all Britain's airports.
Question put and agreed to.
"The great majority of men and women in British public life are honest and hard-working, and observe high ethical standards".
After a lifetime's experience in politics and nearly a quarter of a century as a Member of this House, I know that to be true. Members of this House have a responsibility to conduct themselves according to the high standards which the electorate rightly expect of them. The overwhelming majority of Members do so.
"We would prefer more acknowledgement from the media that the overwhelming majority of public servants work hard and have high standards. We would prefer more recognition of the value of our democratic mechanisms and the dangers of undermining them."
Again, I agree. It can hardly be a coincidence that it is to this House, above all others, that parliamentarians from all over the world come for consultations and advice.
3.35 pm
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to control the level of aircraft noise at airports and aerodromes; and for connected purposes.
This is a modest Bill which responds to concerns about noise levels expressed by those who live near airports. It cannot be a substitute for Government regulations, which many hon. Members have pressed the Government to introduce. The Bill is about research.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |