asked the Minister of Aviation if he will take steps, by legislation or otherwise, to ensure that animals and birds transported by British aircraft are adequately protected so as to ensure their safe arrival in the United Kingdom.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will introduce legislation to prevent unnecessary suffering being caused to birds imported into this country by air.

This is a problem that can most satisfactorily be resolved on an international basis and the International Air Transport Association has set up a study group to examine it. My Department will keep in touch with the Association, but in the meantime, bearing in mind the good practice and record of British operators, I do not propose to introduce legislation.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply and also congratulate him on his first appearance in his new appointment.

That sounds good sense to me. I will refer this matter to the Association, but I think the problem really starts at the consignor end; but we will take advice and give our views to the Association.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that although most of these animals which suffer death and deplorable conditions of carriage are conveyed in foreign aircraft and our own operators have a very good record in this respect, it causes considerable unrest among many people in this country when it is disclosed that animals and birds which have been consigned to this country have been suffering en route? Will the hon. Gentleman, therefore, make the strongest possible representations to the Association?

Yes, Sir.

Will the British Government take an initiative in promoting an international convention in view of the regrettable incidents that occur from time to time?

The Association has already got this matter under consideration. When we examine the Association's views we will give it our views as well. We accept that there is a matter to be dealt with here.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will estimate the value of the output of United Kingdom airlines in the financial year 1965–66 in £ millions at 1964 prices.

About £250 million.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the estimate given in the National Plan for this year is only £236 million? Is he further aware that I wrote to his predecessor on 23rd November last year stating that B.O.A.C. had under-estimated its requirements for jet aircraft, and will he now press Sir Giles Guthrie and his Board to make sure that adequate aircraft are available to meet the capacity needs of the next few years?

I think there is a misunderstanding if the hon. Member thinks that the figure I gave relates to capacity. It is, of course, the actual revenue of all the airlines concerned. The National Plan forecasts are under review, and it may well be that there will be an upward revision in the National Plan target of £340 million for civil air transport in 1970.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will make his permission for an order by the British Overseas Airways Corporation for the Boeing 747 conditional upon the British aircraft industry receiving substantial orders for sub-contract work on this project.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he intends to authorise the development of the VCIO Superb to meet the British Overseas Airways Corporation's requirement for large long-haul jets.

B.O.A.C. has not as yet submitted to me proposals for investment in large long-haul jets. In view of the time needed to develop aircraft, I have had, nevertheless, to consider meanwhile whether the Government could support the VC10 Superb. The whole cost of developing this aircraft would have fallen on the Exchequer, and the market prospects were not such as to hold out any prospects of recovering this expenditure over the limited number of sales foreseen. In all the circumstances, despite the magnificent reputation built up by the Super VC10, I have concluded with regret that the Government cannot support the Superb. Should B.O.A.C. propose to order the Boeing 747, the prospects of United Kingdom subcontracting and all other relevant matters will be borne in mind.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Rolls Royce RB 178 is 120,000 dollars cheaper than the American engine which it is proposed to install in the Boeing 747, and that the value of the contract to the British aircraft industry, if we can get these engines installed, would be 570 million dollars? What action is the Minister taking with the Americans to ensure that there is no discrimination against British suppliers?

I think the hon. Gentleman knows that we have done all in our power, and will continue to do so to support Rolls Royce. It is not a matter for me or for the American Government to determine what engines are used in American civil aircraft. Certainly the hon. Gentleman can rely upon me to do all I can to further the interests of Rolls Royce and this very fine engine.

Does the Minister's statement mean that it is now a matter of Government policy that Britain should opt out of long-distance civil transport in the future?

The policy statement I have made is that I have not been able to undertake the entire launching and development costs of the Superb aircraft having regard to the very limited market which, on the best advice available, is foreseen for it.

Will my right hon. Friend have another thought in this matter as later today we shall be spending a huge amount of money on military aircraft? Could he not find a copper or two to advance civil aviation along the lines suggested?

My hon. Friend's arithmetic is none too accurate. In fact, the launching costs of this Superb aircraft would be in the region of £40 million on the airframe, with additional cost for development of the engine.

Is my right hon. Friend prepared to say whether B.A.C. was prepared to put any of its own money forward for this project? Is he aware that, according to my understanding, the Boeing 747 project is being financed by the Boeing Company itself?

The fact that the whole cost would fall on the Exchequer means, as my hon. Friend suggests, that the company is not prepared to put any of its own money into the development of the aircraft.

How limited is the Minister's assessment of the market, and how far does his figure correspond with that produced by the company through its researches?

I cannot say exactly what figure the company has, but the kind of figure involved would be between 30 and 40 aircraft by 1975 and from 35 to 50 by 1980.

asked the Minister of Aviation what effect the plans for the new Boeing giant aircraft have had on the development programme of the Anglo-French Concord.

The recently announced plans for the Boeing 747 have had no effect upon the Concord development programme. The probable introduction of a very large subsonic jet aircraft in the 1970s is one of the factors which has always been taken into account.

What are the market prospects for the Concord today, and are they affected at all by the fact that the American market seems to be pre-empted to some extent?

The market for supersonic travel is different from that for large long-haul subsonic jets. There is a later Question about the market prospects of the Concord. Perhaps I could wait till that comes.

asked the Minister of Aviation what is the estimated total cost of the Concord project including work up to certificate of airworthiness standards and development flying.

We are still in the process of reviewing the costs of this project with our French partners and I am therefore not yet able to give a revised estimate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is widespread expectation that the estimated total costs will be not less than £375 million? Is he sure that there will be sufficient sales of this aircraft to cover that cost?

I am afraid that I am not in a position to confirm or deny speculation which has occurred in the Press. One of the necessary ingredients of working with other countries is that when we are in consultation with them on matters of this sort, I must not seek to jump the gun by public statements of the kind which the hon. Member invites me to make. There will almost certainly be a substantial increase on the former estimates, partly because of rising costs and changes of specification and partly because the new estimates will include the cost of post-certificate of airworthiness work. I cannot give a figure to the House. I am sorry.

Will the Minister consider a method of giving regular reports to the House about progress in costs and other matters concerning this vast and important technological project?

My hon. Friend the former Parliamentary Secretary gave that assurance in the debate in February. We will, of course, keep the House fully informed, but it would be quite wrong of me to make ex parte statements while we are trying to agree figures—because the costs apply on both sides of the Channel—with my colleagues in Paris.

asked the Minister of Aviation what was the number of firm orders for the Concord aircraft at the latest available date.

Sixteen aircraft have been reserved for B.O.A.C. and Air France. Options on a further 34 aircraft have been taken out by other airlines.

Has there been any request from B.E.A.? Will my right hon. Friend do whatever he can to make certain that this aircraft is sold and firm orders are obtained?

I do not think that the Concord would be appropriate for the route pattern of B.E.A., much as I would like to see additional sales. We shall, of course, do all that we can to ensure that the orders which are placed become firm orders in due course.

Is the Minister now telling the House that the reservations made by B.O.A.C. and Air France are now firm orders, which is what the Question asks?

In the case of B.O.A.C., a memorandum of understanding was signed by the Corporation and my Department in 1962 and, similarly, Air France made a declaration of intent. They are committed to coming to a firm decision when the characteristics of the aircraft are sufficiently advanced.

asked the Minister of Aviation the total sum allocated, at the latest available date, for the building of the Concord supersonic aircraft.

Total commitments on the British side amount to about £70 million, of which about £32 million has already been spent.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that articles have appeared in the Press stating that the cost was at least £280 million up to July of last year and is estimated to be £400 million before the end of this year? Will he look into this matter again and ensure that we are not spending money unnecessarily?

As I have already said, I can take no responsibility for speculation in the Press about either the amount already spent or what may be spent in the course of the programme. I have undertaken to give the House the fullest information as soon as the figures can be agreed with our French partners. I do not accept that those figures will have any relation to the figures quoted by my hon. Friend, which, I understood him to indicate, would be the total cost of the programme and not the amount spent to date.

Would not the Minister agree that unless we go ahead, either ourselves or in partnership with other countries in producing aircraft of the future, and if we have to buy all our aircraft from America, there will be a terrible strain on our balance of payments?

I hardly think that that arises on this Question. I assure the hon. Member, however, that I accept that we should seek to produce for our own requirements as many aircraft as is technically and economically practicable.

asked the Minister of Aviation what American firms have been awarded contracts in the development programme of the Concord project.

No contracts have been placed by my Department with American firms, but the two main contractors, the British Aircraft Corporation and Bristol Siddeley Engines, have placed a number of sub-contracts directly with American firms. The more important of these are with Rohr Corporation, Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge, Cameron Ironworks and Special Metals Incorporated, and Garrett Airesearch Manufacturing Company.

Can the Minister say why the contract for flight test recording systems was also placed with an American firm, Radiation Incorporated, of Florida? Was no British electronics company capable of carrying out this work?

I have no information about that contract. Perhaps the hon. Member will put down a Question.

asked the Minister of Aviation what application he has received from British European Airways Corporation for assisting in establishing a direct airline service between Dyce Airport, Aberdeen, and Norway, to link with existing domestic flights.

None, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that a direct service between Dyce and Stavanger would shorten the journey for everyone with a Scandinavian destination leaving from north of Birmingham, and that, unless B.E.A. does something about it, another concern will step in and start a service, as, for example, Faroes Airways already has between Kirkwall and Stavanger?

These cases are, of course, within the commercial responsibility of any interested operator, subject to licensing.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the Norwegians have shown very high appreciation of the value of links of this kind between Norway and Aberdeen at least, and will he, if necessary, take steps to encourage such links?

We must leave it to the operators to use their commercial judgment in these matters. I appreciate that anyone would want to go to Aberdeen.

Is it not terribly important that a country of the size of Scotland should have much better air links with the Continent, and what is the Minister doing about it?

There appears to be no obvious or immediate case on economic grounds, and my right hon. Friend has no power to subsidise uneconomic services.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will make a statement on the withdrawal from service of the Boeing 707 jets by the British Overseas Airways Corporation because of tail cracks.

During inspection of the wreckage of the B.O.A.C. 707 which crashed in Japan, on 5th March, a small crack due to fatigue was found in part of the vertical tail fin attachment. As a precaution, B.O.A.C., in common with other operators of Boeing 707 aircraft, have been required to examine their aircraft for similar cracks. All B.O.A.C. 707s have now been examined and are back in service. The Air Registration Board, which has kept closely in touch with B.O.A.C., with the Federal Aviation Agency in the United States and with Boeing, is satisfied that this aircraft type is completely airworthy.

Can the Minister say what the cost of this was to B.O.A.C. and whether any other cracks were found on the other aircraft examined? Second, does not he agree that, if this had happened to the Super VC10, the adverse publicity in the United States would have been greater than the adverse publicity attending this incident involving the Boeing 707?

I have no responsibility for publicity. Without notice, I cannot give the actual cost, which, of course, is a matter for the company. I should want notice also to give the exact number of aircraft in which cracks were found, though I think that it was six.

asked the Minister of Aviation what consideration he has given to approval of landing strips for aircraft in North Lanarkshire for the convenience of industrial interests.

My Department has advised the Lanark County Council on the suitability of a number of sites for use by small aircraft of types commonly used for business purposes. No firm proposal has yet emerged.

Are any of these sites in North Lanarkshire, which is the seat of industry in the county? Second, will my hon. Friend bear in mind that such a development would serve admirably the interests of the new town of Cumbernauld, and will he do his utmost to ensure that his Department co-operates to the full in having such landing strips provided in due course?

Except for the fact that my Department has no funds for disposal for these purposes, we are, of course, very happy to provide technical advice and guidance as and when requested.

asked the Minister of Aviation to what extent the faults and shortcomings of the F111B will be remedied in the F111A; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he is satisfied with the potential performance of the F111; and if he will make a statement.

As I said in answer to the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) on 1st March, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and I are kept closely aware of development of the F111A and there is no reason to believe that this aircraft will not satisfy the R.A.F. requirement.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer, but is he aware that there is a third version of this generation of aircraft, the FB111, of which President Johnson is ordering 200? Is he satisfied that this new version will not put the F111 somewhat out of date?

The FB111 version is a version for a strategic bombing rôle, a purpose quite different from that for which we require the F111A, as a Royal Air Force Canberra replacement.

Has the Minister seen a report by the United States House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, part of which was published only a week or two ago, which seemed to cast the gravest doubt on the capability of this aircraft, not only in the nuclear rôle but in the conventional bombing rôle, having regard to a number of criticisms? Is he still satisfied, and, if he cannot make a statement about it now, will he say something much more definite when we come to the debate later today on the F111?

The report to Congress to which tthe hon. Gentleman refers was about the FB111, and the criticisms against this aircraft do not seem to me to be relevant to a consideration of the one which we have ordered. All the information we have, which is, of course, supported by the fact that the United States Air Force is to have it in service two years before it comes to us, makes us quite satisfied that this aircraft will, as at present advised, meet the Royal Air Force requirement.

Since the F111, the basic aircraft, has hardly begun its flight test programme and is in severe difficulties as regards both the compressor and the reheat system, what positive reasons are there for the Minister to believe that it will meet its performance guarantees?

The hon. Gentleman knows quite well that I cannot go into the actual ranges and other characteristics of an operational requirement. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] But, quite clearly, we, along with the United States Air Force, are taking a close interest in this, and the hon. Gentleman, who has acquaintance with the aircraft industry, knows quite well that one cannot wait until an aircraft is actually in service for some years before buying it without being charged with buying an obsolescent aircraft.

In view of the continuing doubts about the performance of the F111, have the Government made arrangements, or, if they have not done so already, will they make arrangements, for some guarantee from the United States in case of, for example, a cancellation, as happened with Skybolt?

I think that we have all the guarantees for delivery of this aircraft and its meeting our requirements which any Government could reasonably request.

asked the Minister of Aviation if, in the public interest, he will give a general direction to British European Airways to arrange their timetable of flights in Scotland to assist those who live and work there.

No. Sir. The timing of B.E.A.'s Scottish flights is a matter for the Corporation, which takes into account local opinion and needs.

Will the Minister seek to alter or to increase the present flights to and from the Highlands, as now it is not possible for those who live and work in the Highlands to use the air services efficiently for business in the South?

It is my understanding that B.E.A. is considering some suggestions from the Highlands Transport Board for improving its timings. As to suggestions about re-timing, the hon. Member will no doubt remember that there is a member of the B.E.A. Board specifically charged with meeting the requirements of the public.

asked the Minister of Aviation what arrangements he made, before handing over Prestwick Airport to the British Airports Authority, concerning reciprocal agreements between this country and foreign countries for the payment of landing fees for military aircraft.

asked the Minister of Aviation what consultations he had, and what agreements were reached, with the United States authorities over the payment of landing fees, before the British Airports Authority assumed responsibility for Prestwick Airport.

Before the British Airports Authority took over Prestwick Airport it was decided that they could not be expected to continue the waiver on landing charges for certain military aircraft (including the Royal Air Force and U.S.A.F.) since they have a statutory obligation to conduct their operations on a commercial basis. I am considering the implications of this with my noble Friend the Minister of Defence for the Royal Air Force. The U.S.A.F., of course, continue to enjoy the free use of navigation services and of land and buildings.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as a result of no arrangement having been made about this before the hand-over, there is at present virtually no use of Prestwick Airport by the U.S. Air Force and the airport will lose about £150,000 a year? Will he see our Defence Department, which has a reciprocal agreement with the Americans, and make arrangements with the U.S. Air Force to bring it back to Prestwick?

As I said, I am discussing this with the Minister of Defence for the Royal Air Force but my information is that the U.S. Air Force has no immediate intention of ceasing operations at Prestwick.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Americans as well as anyone are entitled to pay a fair rent for Prestwick Airport and if no one pays a fair rent Prestwick Airport will close down, which will be to the great indignation of the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Younger)?

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that if the U.S. Air Force does leave Prestwick Airport, as seems likely, it will have a severe effect on the economy of Scotland?

The argument seems to be about whether the U.S. Air Force should pay or not, and that if it continues using the airport without paying any fees that would not help the airport. I am dealing with this matter and will report to the House on the conclusions reached.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will make a statement on the European Launcher Development Organisation meeting held in Paris during the last week of April.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will make a statement on the progress of the European Launcher Development Organisation.

asked the Minister of Aviation what transpired at the recent European Launcher Development Organisation meeting; and if he will make a statement.

As I informed the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd) on 4th May, after a thorough exchange of views with our partners on the problems facing E.L.D.O., the conference was adjourned until 9th June to allow time for further studies.

In that reply the Minister referred to a study of user requirements being done between now and 9th July. Does that mean possible satellite communications? If so, why are the Government to come to some arrangement with America to use American satellite communications for defence purposes?

The hon. Member should know, as he was a member of the Government responsible at the time, that E.L.D.O. is by its convention and charter permitted only to engage in civil activities, so that the question of whether its launchers could be used for civil defence does not arise. The use of satellite communications is one of the uses which not only we but other countries have raised as needing further study before further decisions can be taken on 9th June.

May we take it from the reply that Her Majesty' Government have no intention of abandoning this project and are fully determined to press on in this sphere either with Europe, on a national basis, or both?

I do not see how it would further the cause of E.L.D.O. by pressing on on a national basis. The British Government, along with other Governments, want more information about the technical feasibility both of the E.L.D.O. programme and its possible use and the total cost involved before coming to any decisions about the future programme of E.L.D.O. This was by agreement the reason for the adjournment of the conference.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of my hon. Friends hope that the Government will approach this matter with a great deal of caution so that we do not get too much involved in heavy expenditure on this project but approach it by way of getting better relations between Russia and America in relations to launcher developments?

I shall be interested in any suggestions as to how we can improve relations both with the Soviet Union and the United States in this field, but we are members of the Organisation and as such take a considerable responsibility for deciding its future programme. As my hon. Friend said, we have to apply the same tests to this as to national projects of our own, and our European collegaues agreed that this was a proper approach to make to the problem.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise what a deplorable impression it would create a mong our European partners if Britain were to climb out of the E.L.D.O., which we played such a prominent part in establishing? Cannot he give a really firm, clear and unequivocal answer and assurance that Her Majesty's Government have no such intention?

I think that if I were the right hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys) I would not want to go into too much detail as to how this Organisation was set up, because the fraud involved in finding a use for Blue Streak is abundantly obvious to our European allies.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order to accuse a right hon. Member of fraud?

I did not hear any such accusation.

It was not the right hon. Gentleman against whom I was making the accusation but the Government of the time. I have to answer for the fact that this Organisation was initially started to find a use for Blue Streak. Blue Streak in this rôle has been very useful. I think that is conceded, but in assessing this, like my colleagues of the other European member countries, I want to be satisfied that the programme proposed is worth while technically in terms of its use and in terms of the cost to which we are all asked to contribute.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will set out the number of landings which have taken place each month at London Airport, Heathrow, from March, 1965 to date; and how many landings have taken place each month on the 28R runway compared with the 28L runway, the glidepath to which begins over Putney.

As the reply contains a large number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is my hon. Friend aware that if, as I suspect may be the case, the figures show no improvement, indeed that the slight improvement secured during the summer has gone off and more and more aircraft are coming over this area, I shall be moving, I hope, a Private Members' Bill on this matter, which I hope will receive widespread support in all parts of the House?

Yes, Sir. The problem of noise is a very grave matter indeed, although my hon. Friend will, I trust, accept that the governing factors are climatic and weather conditions which it is very difficult to try to alter.

asked the Minister of Aviation what action is being taken to ensure the availability of British or Anglo-European aircraft suitable to meet the future needs of British European Airways.

asked the Minister of Aviation what discussions he has had with the Chairman of British European Airways and the management of the British Aircraft Corporation with a view to facilitating the purchase by British European Airways of an enlarged version of the Super VC10 aircraft; and if he will make a statement.

B.E.A. is still considering its fleet requirements from 1968 onwards. I am in touch with B.E.A. as well as with the British manufacturers, but the first step must be for B.E.A. to define its requirements, and I have asked it to do this.

Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he is aware of the urgency of a decision here from the point of view of B.E.A. since it has defined its requirements exactly? Can he also assure the House that he realises what very grave damage would be done to the British industry if B.E.A. were required to buy an American aircraft?

I think the right hon. Gentleman will concede that the urgency of the matter does not come to me until I get the proposals, but I appreciate the urgency of decisions and I am quite satisfied that B.E.A. will do its very best to buy British aircraft in future as in the past, and it will certainly have my full encouragement in that objective.

Will the Minister assure the House that if proposals reach him quickly he will consider them quickly and that he will not dally and ultimately damn this project, as he has done with the VC10 Super, by leaving it under consideration for a very long time? Will he say how much money is involved?

Until I hear from B.E.A. what their requirements are, it is impossible for me to give an estimate of the cost. The best evidence of my sense of urgency in this matter is that I have been pressing B.E.A. over a period of time to come forward with their requirements for this period.

Would the Minister get some sense of urgency in this? He has announced today that B.O.A.C. are to buy Boeing aircraft. It would be deplorable if we were not given an opportunity in this country of building and developing the VC10 to meet the avowed needs of B.E.A. where traffic is growing much faster than anticipated.

I think that it will be conceded that I should not order aircraft for either of the Corporations without at least having the views of the Corporations. I accept the urgency. I did not announce today, and it would not be for me to announce today, that B.O.A.C. are buying Boeings. I made it clear that I have had no proposals from B.O.A.C. about their future aircraft requirements.

asked the Minister of Aviation, in view of the increasing theft and pilfering at airports, which is resulting in the loss of foreign business, if he will issue a general direction to the Airports Authority, after discussion with the leaders of the unions, who so far have opposed regular searches and spot checks on workers, to take steps to stop this organised pilfering; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. This is a matter within the management responsibility of the British Airports Authority, and would not be an appropriate subject for a general direction under the Airports Authority Act, 1965. I appreciate however, the hon. Member's concern about this subject and I will draw his remarks to the attention of the Authority.

Is the Minister aware that London Airport is getting such a bad name for thieving that one of the Swiss insurance companies advised its customers not to use London Airport and that this is giving our country a very bad name in Europe. Would the hon. Member—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Would the hon. Member—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Would the hon. Member—

Order. Hon. Members should not waste time by foolish interventions.

I am obliged, Mr. Speaker, especially when they come from Scotland. Would the hon. Member look at the practical suggestions which were published in the Economist?

On a point of order. The hon. Member tried to cast a reflection upon the honesty and integrity of Scottish Members by his remarks.

That is not a point of order for me. Mr. Snow.

Yes, Sir. We knew about the observations of the Swiss insurance company, and we are taking its report into account and examining it. If the hon. Member refers to Section 11 of the Act which I have mentioned he will see that it gives powers to the Authority for the sort of stopping and searching about which he is talking.

asked the Minister of Aviation what was the total expenditure on the Woomera rocket range from 1951 to October 1964, and from October 1964 to date; and what is the estimated future expenditure on this range.

Total expenditure by the United Kingdom, on payments to Australia and on equipment supplied from this country, was approximately £78 million from 1951 to October 1964 and £8 million from November 1964 to date. It is not possible to forecast total future expenditure, but payments are currently running at about £5¼ million per year. All these figures are in addition to considerable expenditure by Australia.

While thanking the Minister for that information, may I ask him to tell the House what is approximately the military share of this expenditure? Does it include, for instance, the testing of spy satellite and re-entry missiles?

I could not give my hon. Friend that information without notice. The testing of nuclear devices has been undertaken in Australia but not at Woomera.

What non-European and non-Commonwealth countries have the use of the facilities at Woomera?

I should want notice of that question, but as far as I am aware the only other proposed use of Woomera is by E.L.D.O., of which Australia is also a member.

asked the Minister of Aviation when a feasibility survey of a second runway at Turnhouse Airport, Edinburgh, will be begun.

Subject to obtaining access to the land it is hoped to start the feasibility survey of the runway this month.

Will the hon. Member give an assurance that he will show the same sense of priority to this as B.E.A., who have said that they regard this matter as one of absolutely top priority?

Yes, Sir. The principle of a new runway has been accepted for a long time and the land is being kept under protection for this future requirement.

asked the Minister of Aviation when he expects the work of enlarging the civil air terminal building at Aldergrove in County Antrim to be completed; and what steps he is taking to prevent overcrowding at the airport during the summer, and particularly when flights are delayed owing to weather conditions or from other reasons.

Work on the extension of the terminal building has now been started and it is expected to be completed in stages during the spring and summer of next year. Work on the main public areas—the departure lounge and the arrivals concourse—should be complete by the end of May, 1967. As my right hon. Friend informed the hon. Member on 25th February, some congestion at busy periods this summer will be inescapable, but by phasing and restricting the work in the public areas we hope to alleviate the inconvenience as far as possible.

Would not the Minister expedite this work, bearing in mind the chaos in the passenger area which has happened in the past as a result of delayed flights? Cannot something be done a little earlier than the summer of 1967?

My Department is very alive to this point and it has expedited the completion of this terminal building by one year. It has been brought forward accordingly.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will give a general direction to British European Airways not to issue take-away bottles of free alcoholic drinks, and to reduce fares accordingly.

No, Sir, this would not be appropriate. Provided there is compliance with the relevant tariff requirements, it is for B.E.A. to decide what hospitality to offer to their first-class passengers.

Yes, but does not the Minister regard it as rather absurd that along with the sausage and egg on the Edinburgh and Glasgow routes there should also be the issue of free toddy?

There is some doubt as to whether B.E.A. are acting strictly in accordance with regulations, and this is being examined.

Sir John Langford-Holt—next Question.

Is my hon. Friend aware—

Order. The hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Rankin) has no prescriptive right to be called.

asked the Minister of Aviation, in view of the facts that conditions are imposed upon retail concessionaires at airports requiring a minimum price at which duty-free cigarettes are to be sold and that these conditions have resulted in 200 cigarettes of British manufacture being sold at a price 6s. 6d. above the price for which they are sold in European airports, if he will give a general direction, in the public interest, to the Airports Authority not to make similar conditions in future contracts.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will give a general direction to the Airports Authority to provide competing retail outlets for the sale of duty-free spirits and tobacco.

No, Sir. The matters referred to are not appropriate to a general direction under Section 2(6) of the Airports Authority Act, 1965.

Is the Minister aware that virtually by contracts which his Ministry signed and which are merely being extended under the new dispensation British cigarettes are sold not, as is said in the Question, for 6s. 6d. more but for 7s. 4d. more than on the Continent of Europe? Is he aware that he is handing over a monopoly situation and telling the House that he proposes to do nothing about it? Would he look at it again?

London Airport has the distinction of being the only major international airport in Europe which is not heavily subsidised, and we want to keep it that way.

Is the Minister aware that this is a restrictive practice of the most flagrant nature, being supported and endorsed by the Government? Will he have a word with the President of the Board of Trade with a view to referring the whole situation of the Monopolies Commission?

On the face of it, I should not think that that was desirable. These matters are entirely within the commercial competence of the Authority.

asked the Minister of Aviation what progress was made in his discussions with the French last month on the possibility of collaboration on helicopters.

This subject was discussed at the meeting which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and I had with the French Minister for the Armed Forces on 6th May. We established that a basis for collaboration exists and further talks will shortly be held.

Would not the Minister agree that Europe has lost the capability of producing an independent helicopter at the present time and that it is, therefore, vital that these talks not only succeed but are expedited? Will he, therefore, give an assurance that he will do all in his power to make sure that this project gets started and goes forward at a good speed?

We will certainly do all we can to further the possibility. As I have said, the talks took place only on 6th May. Steps to obtain a joint military requirement over a range of helicopters are already in progress. It is the intention of my right hon. Friend and myself to seek a further meeting with M. Messmer towards the end of July.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will make a statement about the development of British vertical-take-off aircraft.

The Statement on the Defence Estimates confirmed the development of the P1127 V.T.O.L. aircraft for part of the R.A.F. ground attack and Army close support rôle. The development programme is proceeding satisfactorily and initial orders related to production aircraft have been placed.

Is it not a fact that the P1127 is subsonic and that because of delays in submitting the order it is now virtually obsolete? Is the Minister aware that our partners in the evaluation squadron, both America and Germany, have several new projects in hand? Are we to be left behind once again?

My experience is to the contrary and that in both Germany and the United States it is realised that this aircraft gives us a very real lead in this field. We have an aircraft that is already flying and on which there has been a lot of experience, and the development aircraft is shortly due to fly. I do not think that in the rôle for which the P1127 is designed supersonic speed is essential. As, however, the hon. Member probably knows, we are undertaking studies to see whether by plenum chamber burning we can increase the thrust of the engine.

asked the Minister of Aviation what support the Government are giving to the proposals for the joint design and construction by VFW Fokker and a British aircraft manufacturer of a new twin-jet feeder aircraft for sale to world airlines.

As I said on 25th February in the reply given to the hon. Member for Coventry, North (Mr. Edelman),

"The Government have agreed, on the basis of a special funding arrangement proposed by the Federal German Government, to the development of the Bristol Siddeley M45H engine chosen by the German company for their VFW614 project.

"Apart from this collaboration on the engine, we have decided that financial assistance from public funds cannot be made available to enable a British airframe manufacturer to participate as a principal on a risk-sharing basis in a project based on the VFW614 design."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 25th February, 1966; Vol. 725, c. 163.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Britain has again lost out in an opportunity of sharing with Europe in what might be a valuable earner? In view of the unanimous recommendation of the Plowden Report that we should collaborate with Europe, will the Minister look at this matter again and see whether we cannot join in this project?

The Plowden recommendation, and certainly Government policy, is that we should seek profitable and satisfactory co-operative arrangements. This does not mean, and never can mean, that we most join every venture in which we are invited to join. I am not satisfied that the outcome of our participation in this venture would return to the taxpayer the substantial money that our participation on a principal basis would have involved.

asked the Minister of Aviation when he will ratify The Hague Protocol to the Warsaw Convention.

Her Majesty's Government hope to do this very soon.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that nine months ago the former Parliamentary Secretary wrote to me:

"The time has clearly come"—

The hon. Member must not read. He must tell us.

"The time has clearly come when, one way or another, we should go ahead and ratify the Protocol."

I shall as soon as possible, as soon as the necessary preparations have been made, invite the Foreign Office to deposit the instrument of ratification. The Protocol will come into effect for us three months after that has been done.

Is there not a risk that the long delay which, for various reasons, has elapsed between the passing by Parliament of the enabling Act and ratification may have resulted in The Hague Protocol in respect of compensation for personal injury being already somewhat out-of-date? Will the hon. Gentleman consider this?

There are extremes of thought about the limitations imposed or proposed under the Protocol. We think we have achieved the best solution we can. It has not been an easy matter. We are not the only parties to it.