Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood) (Con): The House is most grateful to the Chairman of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody), whose magisterial influence made this debate possible. I regret that we are not having a full debate on the aviation White Paper, which is long overdue. I trust that the Government have not delayed that necessary debate for any considerations stemming from the forthcoming mayoral and European elections.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Tony McNulty) indicated dissent.
Mr. Wilkinson: Heaven forfend: I see the pained look on the Minister's face. Even so, the debate is welcome, and I especially approved of the statement by the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich that there was a need for clear decisions on the part of the Government. That is true. We need clear and urgent decisions, but we also need them to be correct. In that regard, I am not over optimistic.
The first of the Government's decisions that I bewail is the decision to allow the EU to be responsible for air service agreements. The right to conclude such agreements with other countries is one of the aspects of national sovereignty that a country such as our own, with so many overseas connections, should hold most dear. I fear very much that our continental partnersif that is the right wordwill be very glad that we have handed the British golden goose over to Brussels, so that it can be carved up in their interests, and so that we, and the goose, can be thoroughly stuffed.
The UK is the premier destination in Europe for north Atlantic transatlantic travel. Our economy and our airlines have benefited immeasurably from that. However much the Prime Minister may hobnob in
Berlin with the federal German Chancellor and the President of France, I suspect that they and their friends in the European Commission will ensure that there is a more equitablein their eyesdistribution of air services across the north Atlantic that would favour Frankfurt and Paris.The main problem then would not be congestion at Heathrow, but the direction of the European Commission. We would have no redress against that, and I hope that the Government will reflect on what they have done. In addition, I ask my right hon. Friend the Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight), the shadow Minister on the Opposition Front Bench, to consider the possibility of a manifesto commitment to reverse the evil that the Government have done.
However, I shall not be too scathing about of the Government. At least they have adopted a gradualist approach in the White Paper, which I think is wise, as none of us knows how civil air transport will develop. We cannot predict the oil price, and we do know the full impact that ultra-wide bodied aircraft such as the A380 will have on the patterns of air transport. On a day when we mourn with our Spanish friends a horrific terrorist outrage on the train system of Spain, who knows what the consequence of another terrorist episode directed towards air transport would have upon the industry? We cannot preclude that possibility.
The gradualist approach is right and the Government are correct to make the best use of existing runways. Although the second runway at Manchester is necessaryand I would not argue against another runway at Birmingham and another runway is certainly required at Stansted at an early datewe should nevertheless make the best use of the existing airport system.
We have not yet made the best use of Stansted, which has the greatest potential in the medium to long term. Heathrow is in an ultra-over-congested part of London, where there are serious environmental considerations, which cannot, as the Liberals suggest, be addressed by 3p on a litre of aviation kerosene. Stansted is nearer than Heathrow to the Thames gateway and the East Anglian corridor of economic development, and low-cost carriers such as easyJet and Ryanair have been able to expand there. We should put most of our future development at Stansted and not at Heathrow.
Mr. Stringer: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Wilkinson: No, I will not because I want to be brief. I appreciated the hon. Gentleman's speech, which was seriousunlike that of the Liberal spokesman, the hon. Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Mr. Marsden)but I am conscious that other hon. Members want to speak.
Since the Crossrail project is not yet envisaged for Heathrow, surface transport access will remain poor. The Government admit that a sixth terminal will be required, which will cause ever more congestion to the surface transport system in that area. Although we may have mixed-mode operations, which will help to get more utilisation out of Heathrow, there is a risk that Heathrow's development may be somewhat diminished
by a slot auction imposed by the European Union. I hope that the Government will think again about Heathrow.There is the possibility of air traffic conflicting with traffic out of Northolt, and the Government admit that this is a debateable point. We saw with the arrival of the former detainees from Guantanamo bay in a C-17 how important Royal Air Force Northolt is for the security of the country, and I would not want the development of a third east-west runway at Heathrow to preclude that.
If there is further runway development, it should be at Gatwick. Gatwick has two terminals, and its full potential has not been utilised. The Government are correct to consider the possibility seriously and make preparations by safeguarding space for a new wide-spaced runway at Gatwick. I hope that another runway at Gatwick has priority over any question of another runway at Heathrow.
Finally, I echo the wise sentiments of my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Mr. Howarth), whose constituency includes Farnborough. In using existing facilities, the Government emphasise the importance that the White Paper places on using airports for regional development. It is noteworthy how far point-to-point services, rather than services out of hub airports, have grown in recent years. That tendency will accentuate, particularly with the fuller utilisation of Luton, which we look forward to, Southampton, Manston, London City and all the airports in the midlands and the northa new one is starting at Finningley. Further developments are envisaged in the north of England, Scotland and Wales, which are all to the good.
In that process, I hope that Her Majesty's Government recognise the benefits of business aviation. My hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot pointed to Farnborough, and I say to him that RAF Northolt's primary function is its critical RAF role, and therefore if there is any overspill of business aviation, it should go to airports such as Farnborough, Biggin Hill and Luton. If the Government continue with their gradualist approach but take the key decision to go ahead with the second runway at Stansted as soon as possible, we can get the balance right. The worst thing that we could possibly do is not only to put the golden goose at risk by handing it on a platter to Brussels, butthis is what the Liberals would doto actually kill it off with over-taxation.
Mrs. Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab/Co-op): I, too, welcome the publication of the aviation White Paper after a gap of 20 years. I particularly welcome the parts of the White Paper that dwell on the points highlighted by the Transport Committee report on aviation, which examines the connection between the development of regional economies and transport in general, and aviation in particular.
I note that the estimates refer to
The Select Committee report stresses the importance of air links to regional development and discusses the inadequacy of spending billions of pounds on regional development without making that link. Indeed, the report states:
Liverpool and Merseyside are objective 1 areas. That means that they receive large amounts of European funding, which is then matched by public and private sector funding from this country, to promote the regional economy. That funding has already achieved some success: the economy of Liverpool in particular and Merseyside in general is indeed being transformed. We have a major opportunity because Liverpool has been designated European city of culture for 2008, which is a tribute to Liverpool's achievements and recognition of its potential. In fulfilling that potential, it is vital that in the years up to 2008 and beyond we facilitate easy access to Liverpool for the many tourists and business visitors from not only the rest of this country and Europe but, indeed, across the world.
Liverpool John Lennon airport has already shown how to bring success to air travel. It is the fastest-growing airport in the country and has served 3.18 million passengers in the past year. I know that in comparison with other airports, including Manchester International, that might seem a relatively small number of passengers, but the dramatic increase in business is a great tribute to the work of the management and owners. Those numbers are destined to increase significantly to 5.5 million by 2015 and 8.6 million by 2030.
The airport's success has been built on the great increase in its scheduled flights as well as in its charter flightsthere are scheduled flights to destinations such as Dublin, Alicante, Geneva, Amsterdam, Madrid, Paris and Barcelona. I say to the hon. Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Mr. Marsden) that the rapid expansion of John Lennon airport has opened out the opportunities for air travel for people from middle and lower-income groups, which is welcome and should be built uponit should not be penalised and seen as something detrimental. That increase in opportunities is welcome and should be encouraged.
During the past month, Liverpool has restored a direct flight to our capital, London, with a VLM Airlines flight to London City airport. That is a success, but it is a shame that Liverpool lost its access to a hub airport in London when British Midland withdrew its flightsfor the very reason set out in the Committee's report and mentioned in the debatenot because they were not profitable, but because it was more profitable for the company to use its aircraft for other European flights.
John Lennon airport has shown what it can do to develop the local, sub-regional economy, to bring visitors and to encourage business. What Liverpool now
needs, to enable us to make that major leap forward and grasp the opportunities provided by the city's designation as European capital of culture, is access to a hub airport, which would provide interlining, direct bookings and no repeat check-ins from airports all over the world. People could then come to Liverpool easily, from Shanghai to Sydney, New York to New Delhi, Los Angeles to Lagosin other words, from throughout the world. It is essential that we have that link with a hub airport.The Government's response to the Committee's report suggests that they recognise the importance of linking regional airports with hub airports in our capital and it suggests some measures to try to make that possible. While I welcome those measures, I do not think that they go far enough. The White Paper mentions public service obligationsPSOsand the possible introduction of such measures to link up airports such as Liverpool with London hub airports. The White Paper mentions consultation on the detail of what would enable an airport to qualify for a PSO, but there has been no consultation so far. Nor has any guidance been issued on what the criteria might be. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister could say when such consultation might start and when the criteria will be issued.
I welcome the reference in the White Paper to the role that regional development agencies might play, including the route development fund, but that is not enough. We need to know more about the resources available, and I would like to see the Bill on the powers for the anticipated directly elected regional assembly for the north-west, which will be published shortly, include some clearer transport powers, so that the assembly would be able to facilitate a direct link.
It is clear that the Government have recognised the points that have been made by the Committee and others about the importance of transport and aviation to regional economies, and the Government have made some suggestions. It says in the White Paper:
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |