Clause 5 - Public Airport Companies: Power of Secretary
Civil Aviation Bill
6:00 pm
Graham Stringer (Manchester, Blackley, Labour)
The clause amends section 17(4) of the Airports Act 1986, and it is worth casting our minds back to that Act, as it set up airport companies in the public sector. You will remember, Sir Nicholas, that the Government of the day were particularly concerned, almost to the point of paranoia, that local authorities would use any device that they possibly could to get around the Government's capital controls or the controls on their basic functions. The Government therefore included section 17, which basically said that an airport could not be used to do something that a local authority that owned the airport could not do.
Politically, we have moved a long way from that point. Those airport companies, such as that at Manchester and a number of others, have shown themselves to be very responsible. We have also moved into a world in which airports around the world are changing and looking to the United Kingdom for expertise. BAA runs a number of airports and provides a number of services to airports in every continent of the world, I think. Airports have diversified into the functions around them and provide services that they perform well to other bodies.
I support this clause, which gives the Secretary of State the power to say that airports that are owned by local authorities and in the public sector can do things that BAA, as the best example, can do. That is good for those airports commercially and good for the United Kingdom, which leads the world in many such services. That sits nicely alongside the decision that the Government took six years ago to free up local authority-owned airports from capital controls. I welcome the drive of the clause.
I tabled the amendments because although I welcome that drive I think it good to reflect on how much power is being left in the hands of the Secretary of State. The power that the Secretary of State has or does not have has come up in our discussions on every clause. I am always surprised when I listen to Conservative Members of Parliament in Committee arguing that the Secretary of State should have more control, and arguing for more targets and more regulation. When I read the Official Report yesterday, the Conservatives were saying that they wanted less regulation, fewer targets and less control by the Secretary of State.