I agree with the hon. Gentleman and I believe that my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Justine Greening) made a similar point. I want the argument to proceed rationally, sensibly and relatively good-humouredly, but it is difficult when getting facts out of the airport is harder than drawing teeth. When it answers letters, the replies do not entirely fit the questions that one has put. There may be all sorts of good reasons for that.
I share the hon. Gentleman’s concerns, however. I want the airport to thrive but in way that is not antisocial. I want it to thrive in a way that allows it to make a profit and to expand but which is also sympathetic to the concerns not only of the people who live within the 10-mile radius. By ““local””, the Government mean within 10 or 12 miles of an airport. People who live 20 to 50 miles away are not considered local and therefore have no leverage on the decisions that affect them. I agree with the hon. Gentleman and I wish that I could get the Government to persuade the airport company and the Civil Aviation Authority to be as reasonable as he is. If that were possible, we would have a happier set of residents in Leicestershire.
Civil Aviation Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Garnier
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 10 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Civil Aviation Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
437 c78 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:56:30 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_266082
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_266082
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_266082