1514
London Airport
[MR. MARTEN.]
11 APRIL 1963
of any ground running at night. Com- plaints are investigated immediately.
As the hon. Member for Lough- borough appreciates, a great deal of work is also being done by way of research to lessen the noise of jets. This is being carried out in Britain at the National Gas Turbine Establishment, near Farnborough, at the College of Aeronautics, at Cranfield, and at South- ampton University. The Government spent £400,000 on this last year. It costs B.O.A.C., which is only one airline, £410,000 a year in extra fuel and lost payload because of the noise; £10,000 a year to maintain the suppressors; and the suppressors themselves cost B.O.A.C. £397,000 as an item of capital equip- ment. The earth banks and mufflers cost £400,000. Hon. Members will see what one airline is doing in the way of suppressing noise to help the consti- tuents of those who have taken part in the debate.
Mr. Hunter rose————
Mr. Marten: I must press on with my speech.
The hon. Member for Loughborough asked about the new planes and another hon. Member asked whether these would be noisier. The development of the by- pass engine, in particular, has reduced jet noise for the same engine power. The Trident will be 8 to 10 perceived noise decibels quieter than the Comet for the same thrust. There are signs of great progress in this respect. The B.A.C.111 is in the same range as the Trident.
I think that the hon. Member for Loughborough has taken this matter up with the British Aircraft Corporation in respect of the VC10. The Corporation tells me that the VC10, with an all-up weight of 299,000 lb., registered 1014 perceived noise decibels, whereas the Super VC10, with an all-up weight of 320,000 lb., registered 102 perceived noise decibels. This is a remarkable feat for this remarkable plane. I am sure that hon. Members agree that this is progress in the right direction.
Ther e many more points which I would much like to make. I have
the answers to many questions and will send them to hon. Members. But time has run out and I must give way to the next debate.
Hong Kong
1512
These are some of the things being done to tackle this most irritating problem. It is a problem which I recognise. I thank my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Chertsey for having raised the question and I thank other hon. Members for having contributed to the debate. I hope that they will accept that the Government are doing their best to solve the problem. I should like to end by joining the hon. Member for Eton and Slough, who has now left the Chamber, in expressing sympathy par ticularly with those who are sick and old and who, perhaps, suffer more than any other people from this very irritating noise.
1.39 p.m.
HONG KONG
Dr. Jeremy Bray (Middlesbrough, East) It is many years since the House had an opportunity of giving its full attention in debate to the affairs of Hong Kong. I am sure hon. Members will feel that it is high time that we did so. I trust, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, that you will allow this debate to overrun at least to the extent it has been overrun by its predecessor.
Hong Kong is now our most populous dependent territory, with a population higher than that of New Zealand and a foreign trade equal to half that of the whole of India. It has our sole common frontier with the Communist world and it is our most intimate contact with the most numerous race on earth. I think that hon. Members will agree, too, that we have a special responsibility for the 34 million people, mostly Chinese, who have chosen to live in Hong Kong.
I know that many hon. Members wish to speak so I will plunge straight into the consideration of the future of Hong Kong without dwelling on its great past achievements or upon the spell which it casts over all who visit Hong Kong, a charm which I have known since my childhood, for I was born there. Much needs to be said about the social and political developments within Hong Kong and I hope that my right hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough, East (Mr. Bottomley) will have an opportunity to say something about this. My time is limited, so I shall concentrate on the economic and external affairs of the terri- tory.
1513
11 APRIL 1963
Hong Kong The key to the understanding of Hong Kong and of its future is its unique economic position. Hong Kong has enor- mous overseas trade. Since 1952, when industrialisation and local manufactures began in a big way, Hong Kong has had a very large gap in its balance of visible trade. In 1962, the value of exports was only 66 per cent. of imports, leaving a gap of £140 million in an import bill of £420 million. Most modern economies certainly do have a deficit on visible trade, including our own, but whereas our gap has not exceeded 10 per cent. in any recent year, Hong Kong's is 34 per cent. India certainly has a comparable gap, but this is in a country which has an enormously larger domestic economy, and in India it is covered by carefully negotiated loans between Governments. Hong Kong receives no Government .loans.
Some of the gap in the balance of Hong Kong's trade is filled by invisible earnings, notably from tourism, but undoubtedly the large remaining gap indicates a very substantial inflow of capital. The source of this capital, I understand, is mainly overseas Chinese all over South-East Asia who are invest- ing their money in Hong Kong, and who find it profitable to do so. No one seems able to say just how large is this capital inflow. One reason for this lack of statistics-which is being remedied now is the happy position of the Hong Kong Government in having practically no national debt.
As the Government have not had to borrow money they are not bothered about having to pay it back, or paying interest on debt. So the Hong Kong Government say that the balance of payments is self-regulating, surely an ideal economy in the eyes of the hon. Members opposite. The Government just do not have to know what is going on in the way that we have to know in this country. This is fine so long as the capital inflow continues. Even if the capital inflow falls off the Govern- ment can still avoid embarrassment to themselves or to the currency by reduc- ing their spending on capital goods, on capital programmes. It would be the private citizen, the ordinary worker, who would suffer.
Much of the money coming into Hong Kong is now being invested in property. The supply of land is very limited and
Hong Kong
it all belongs to the Government and the Government make a good deal of money by the sale of land leases at prices which put London's land prices quite in the shade. Government income from this source in 1962-63 doubled over that of the previous year to over £11 million, and it is sufficient to finance the whole of the Government's impres- sive public works building programme for housing, education, and health ser- vices. So the private property investor from abroad is financing the Govern- ment as well as the private building in the economy.
There is, of course, a spiral in this investment boom. It is highly profit- able to invest in property which is to house the people who are to build the next property in which one is to invest, and so on. The Hong Kong Govern- ment are very well aware of the dangers of such a boom running away to the point where it "busts", with a fall off in new investment destroying the profit- In his ability of former investments. Budget speech on 27th February, the Financial Secretary in Hong Kong said that one of his
66
we
come to
'nightmares is that by rapid and wasteful
end expansion
the
of resources with an incomplete and unbalanced structure
our
In other words, it is necessary to build up Hong Kong's industry and trade so that it can earn a sound living. Certainly, no one development will secure this, but it does seem to me that a new element is needed in the situation other than the old battle of tariffs and quotas.
It would be helpful, at this point, to consider the political position of Hong Kong.
It exists because it is useful to China, not only as a meeting place with the outside world but as a very sub- stantial source of foreign exchange. Hong Kong imports, mainly of food, from China in 1962 were £75 million. Its exports to China were £5 million, leaving China with foreign exchange earnings of £70 million.
From China's point of view this meeting place with the outside world is as con- venient in British hands as any.
As an independent territory everyone recognises that it would become a cockpit for the struggle between Chinese Nationalists and Communists which could only lead to its absorption into China, with the loss of its value as a meeting place. Also,