FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1938
1938 - 1518.PDF
-520 FLIGHT. MAY 26, 1938. and he hoped that British Airways, against which company-he had no complaints to make, would not be given such a monopoly. Although he agreed that it was unsatisfactory fora large number of competing concerns to be flying in Europe, he thought that there should at least be more than one. Threeother companies were mentioned by Col. Ropner as suitable recipients for at least a part of the subsidy. One of them,West Coast Air Services (i.e., Olley Air Service), were pre- paring to operate a new service to Luxembourg. If a subsidywas being given, financially sound and efficient companies other than British Airways should receive a share of it. MAJOR PROCTOR gave examples of the failure of State controlin various enterprises and said that his party believed that State ownership was a questiop of wisdom and expediency.The proper function of the Government was not to own or to manage air services, but to make regulations for the safety ofthose who used them. All developments and inventions had been brought about by private enterprise. He asked whetherthe Under-Secretary was quite satisfied that there was no inter- ference with the air services by the railway companies. MR. PICKTHORN emphasised the need for compression-ignitiondevelopment, and stressed the importance of the British West Indies as an area where new lines should be developed. Anattempt had been made to establish such air lines soon after the War, but lack of a subsidy, coupled with the smallness ofthe Colonial units involved, prevented these lines from being a success. He suggested that competition over the Pacificwould be ill-judged and probably unsuccessful, and said that, beyond our main trunk lines, we should concentrate on start-ing more feeder lines. He thought that more support ought to be given to private flying and that money spent in thisway would be more useful than that spent on internal airlines. A Qood Word MR. LYONS reminded the House that whatever might be saidabout the European routes Imperial Airways had done their work very well on the Empire routes. He asked what sumwould be set aside for the Australia-New Zealand service, and whether a condition was made that there should be reciprocalarrangements with any joint operating company. Apparently we would, for instance, never be granted permission to use theHawaiian Islands for the Pacific service. He asked how the internal airline subsidy was to be distributed and what helpwas to be given to municipal airports. Finally, Jie asked a number of questions about the future of the Empire servicesand, in particular, of the Short Mayo Composite. MR. D. ADAMS brought up his guns in defence of State ormunicipal ownership and asked that the Government should spend a proportion of the internal subsidy on the light aero-plane clubs. He suggested that the licence subsidy figure for every pilot should be raised from £25 to £40 so that clubscould train pilots for nothing. Such a move would provide an additional reserve of pilots at small cost. MR. PERKINS congratulated the new Air Minister on tearingup a page of the Cadman Report and the whole of the Maybury Report within the first twenty-four hours of his appointment,thus giving the necessary encouragement to internal operators. He asked the Under-Secretary if any of the dismissed pilotshad been offered employment by any of the companies con- cerned; whether any steps had been taken by Imperial Airwaysto set up a Whitley council; whether the London-Paris pooling scheme had made any progress; and whether it was possibleto say which companies would be eligible for subsidy. SIR MURRAY SUETER also asked about the Short Mayo andhow the North Atlantic services were progressing. He asked the Air Minister to speed up the South American developmentsand to look into the whole question of air services in the West Indies. In connection with the Pacific service he reminded theHouse of the accident to the Samoan Clipper and hoped that the diesel engine would be developed for long-distance workin time. He asked whether any share of the internal subsidy would go to help the Newcastle-Stavanger line which, he under-stood, had previously been refused a subsidy. He also hoped that the Langstone Harbour plans would be given due atten-tion, and added that considerable difficulties had been experi- enced with the Southampton Base at present used. Explanations CAPT. HAROLD BALFOUR, the new Under-Secretary of Statefor Air, explained that it was not for him to discuss the problem of State control versus private enterprise, but that the Govern-ment had decided that private enterprise, controlled and limited by the State, should be the principle in the development ofcivil aviation during the period in which the present agree- ments were to run. Some discrimination in subsidy grant wasobviously necessary because of the different conditions under which the various operating companies were working.Imperial Airways, for instance, must have a privileged posi- tion. He explained that the subsidy would not be available for compression-ignition research, but that money was avail-able under the civil aviation vote for this particular purpose. He agreed with the necessity for its development, but said that,at present, the petrol engine was very much more efficient. The Germans had had a certain amount of success with theirdiesels, but none were in regular use on German air lines. The dividends of Imperial Airways averaged 4! per cent, duringthirteen years and indirect subsidies had been taken into con- sideration when the financial arrangements were made. Themail payments were for services rendered and on a normal scale. In the meantime the risk of loss was being borne byindividual shareholders rather than by taxpayers in general. The whole question of civil aviation was being examinedand the Government would not be tied by the recommenda- tions of the Cadman Committee. All companies would beeligible for a subsidy, though it should be remembered that any successful company would need to accept the obligationof having a Government director on its board. He was in entire sympathy with other members on the question of pilots'pay. He wanted to see that commercial aviation should pro- vide a career which would not be confined to flying activitiesand did not see why, in the future, the pilots' pay should not be represented by something like 85 per cent, as basic salaryand 15 per cent, as payments on results. He could give no information as to the way in which the internal subsidy wouldbe divided and the formation of a joint operating company for the London-Paris route was still under consideration. The importance of air services in the West Indies was realisedand the matter was being examined. The trials of the Mayo Composite had been satisfactory and it was hoped that theupper component would be crossing the Atlantic during the present summer. He agreed that it was necessary to proceedimmediately with the Empire Air Base and he proposed to go to Langstone Harbour himself quite shortly. The position of the flying clubs would be looked into inrelation to their training value for defence purposes and the same could be said of private and municipal aerodromes.Where these were important for defence purposes it might be possible to provide some form of assistance. In order to see whether pilots would prefer to be representedby a domestic committee or by the Pilots Association, a ballot in Imperial Airways was about to be taken. Of the five dis-missed pilots interviewed by the Government directors two had been favourably considered and one recommendation madefor reinstatement, either with Imperial Airways or with a joint company, but for technical reasons the company was not ableto agree to this reinstatement. It was not fair to say that the pilots had been condemned in the dark. The motion for rejection was negatived by 173 votes to 108and the Bill was read a second time. Licensing Problems After SIR KINGSLEY WOOD had moved that an address bepresented to His Majesty in pursuance of sub section (3) of Section 5 of the Air Navigation Act, 1936, praying that theAir Navigation (Licensing of Public Transport) Order, 1938, be made in the terms of the draft laid before Parliament, MR. WEDGWOOD BENN asked for some information about thelicensing arrangements. It was extremely important, he said, that they should know exactly what the relations between thelicensed firms and their employees were likely to be. He sug- gested that the Airline Pilots' Association, for instance, shouldbe allowed to approach the licensing authority to say whether or not a particular firm was fit to receive a licence. The pilotswere the most important people concerned. MR. R. ROBINSON asked whether it was intended to put astop to the ban on airline bookings, or whether the Railway Clearing House, as an outside body, would be able to keep upthe ban in spite of the section in the Order which would pre- vent companies from placing such a ban. He also asked aboutthe position of charter companies under this licensing order. MR. PERKINS asked about the question of appeal againstthe ruling of the Authority and about the costs involved for a company when, and if, frivolous or vindictive opposition waslodged. He asked when the booking ban would finally be lifted. CAPT. BALFOUR said that employees of operating companieswere adequately safeguarded by the fact that anyone granted a licence had to apply the Fair Wages Clause. He gave anassurance that the booking ban would be entirely lifted when the Order came into operation—which would be -within a monthor two. Charter operators were included in that Order, but ordinary joy-riding firms were not. In the matter of appealsthe licensing authority would be an impartial body, but legal redress would be available. The Attorney General (SIR DONALD SOMERVELL) explainedthat it would-be contrary to precedent to give to any but a recognised court the power to award costs, but the number ofpeople who could object was limited and the licensing authority would be able to see when objections were frivolous. The Motion was agreed to.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
