Air Travel and Health
The Committee's commentary on the Government
Response
1. In December 2007 the Committee published its
report Air Travel and Health: an Update[1]
as a short follow-up to an earlier report Air Travel and Health[2].
The Government response to our follow-up report, which we received
at the end of February 2008, is published in the Appendix to this
report.
2. In many respects, the Government have responded
positively to our recommendations, with the Aviation Health Unit
(AHU) and the Aviation Health Working Group (AHWG) taking the
lead on most initiatives. There are some aspects of the response,
however, on which we wish to make some comment.
Recommendation 5.1
3. We recommended that efforts should be made
to raise the profile of the AHU. As a result, the Government have
announced that they intend to consult colleagues about transferring
the chairmanship of the inter-departmental AHWG from the Department
for Transport to the Head of the AHU. Whilst we understand why
this change is being proposed, we invite the Government to offer
some assurance that this will not make scrutinising the activities
of the AHU and AHWG more difficult.
4. We recommended also that the AHU should become
the body responsible for handling queries and complaints for passengers
on health issues. The Government have not accepted this recommendation,
taking the view that responsibility should remain with the airlines,
especially since some airlines have developed their own medical
expertise. This is a lost opportunity. We heard in evidence how
passengers had not only failed to have what they regarded as a
satisfactory outcome to the handling of their complaints by the
airlines, but had also failed to receive such satisfaction from
the AHU. We remain of the view that concerns about the effectiveness
of the system for the handling of complaints should be addressed
by placing responsibility for dealing with complaints with the
AHU.
Recommendations 5.4 and 5.7
5. The Government agree in principle to support
Phase II of the World Health Organisation Research into Global
Hazards of Travel (WRIGHT) Project to investigate flight-related
factors which may increase the risk of Venous Thrombo-Embolism
(VTE). We welcome this response and we look forward to the outcome
of the project.
6. In our report, however, we expressed some
concern about the United Kingdom's own research capacity in aviation
health matters, and we noted the evidence of Professor Michael
Bagshaw, Aviation Medicine Director at King's College London,
about there being insufficient research into aviation health in
the UK and, in particular, his own university's inability to fund
aviation health research. In their response (to recommendation
5.7), the Government list three research projects funded by the
Medical Research Council with may have some relevance to aviation
health. This falls significantly short of our recommendation that
efforts should be made to increase the UK's research capacity.
Individual research efforts may all be worthwhile but what is
needed is an integrated civilian research capability in aviation
health. We urge the Government to think again and give a clear
directive by designating a central portal through which funding
is directed to aviation medicine.
Recommendation 5.13
6. The Government have not accepted our recommendation
to limit to 30 minutes the amount of time that passengers should
remain in an aircraft when the ventilation systems are non-operational.
The issue of spread of disease by contact with infectious passengers
is high in the public's mind. We accept that wide risk of transmission
of disease in a fully functioning aircraft is negligible. But
the risk of infection increases when closely confined in an aircraft
with no effective filtration. If the Government will not accept
our recommendation 5.13, we would urge them at the very least
to take measures to ensure that having a loaded aircraft with
no ventilation for more than 30 minutes is tolerated only in exceptional
circumstances. We suggest that a reporting system of occasions
on which the 30 minutes is exceeded should be put in place in
order to put pressure on the airlines to avoid such circumstances.
Recommendations 5.17 and 5.18
7. With regard to contaminated air events, we
are pleased that the Government is committed to filling the knowledge
gap in this area and to ensuring that the AHWG-sponsored research
to identify the substances produced during a fume event is completed
urgently. We look forward to seeing the results of this research.
We also welcome the Government's initiative to commission a data
analysis project to determine if there is any correlation between
operational practices and oil and hydraulic fluid leakages into
the aircraft cabin.
1 1st Report (2007-08) (HL Paper 7) Back
2
5th Report (1999-2000) (HL 121-I) Back
| 
