We need your support to keep TheyWorkForYou running and make sure people across the UK can continue to hold their elected representatives to account.

Donate to our crowdfunder

Clause 18 - Licence conditions

Part of Civil Aviation Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 1:15 pm on 1st March 2012.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Jim Fitzpatrick Jim Fitzpatrick Shadow Minister (Transport) 1:15 pm, 1st March 2012

I am grateful for that generous description. I give credit to the Department and the Minister, because the information required in clauses 83, 84 and 85 is pretty much the information suggested here. The difference between what we are proposing and what the Government have not quite addressed yet is whether there should be a licensed requirement on the airport as regards the CAA and the passenger; it therefore becomes a more important and emphatic dimension to aviation travel. I do not think there is any disagreement between the Government and us about the fact that the intelligence and information would be useful for passengers; the issue is about what level of requirement is needed.

In her response on the immigration dimension, will the Minister cover the experience of eye scanners and the latest technology, and how much of a role that is playing in helping to move passengers through? We see the scanners at airports now and, although there were teething problems as with any new technology, they seem to be working better. How much has been invested in that technology? It would be interesting to hear the Government’s response.

With regard to adverse weather elements, as I mentioned earlier we all know the sad tale of 2009-10 and the appointment of Sir David Quarmby. Sadly, notwithstanding his recommendations, similar problems were found in 2010-11; not all the lessons had been learned or the recommendations applied. How might the Quarmby recommendations provide the framework for the annual survey? He made recommendations about what could be done to ensure that the passenger experience was more pleasurable.

Amendment 19 would require the development of passenger welfare plans. Clearly, contingency arrangements are needed—especially where there may be fault, but also generally where there may not be fault.