text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/012/06012.i-iv.html"> Civil Aviation Bill</a> - <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/012/amend/51010m01.htm"> New Clause 4</a> - Commercial Flights Officer
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  <p>The proposed <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/012/amend/51010m01.htm"> New Clause 4</a> of the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/012/06012.i-iv.html"> Civil Aviation Bill</a> was turned down by those who voted No.</a>
  
  <p>This Clause would have required the Secretary of State to appoint a "Commercial Flights Officer" who would have had unrestricted access to all information held by any organisation about the aircraft flights (time, height, speed, route, and type), and whose duty would have been to collate and publish factual details about nightflights and noise whenever requested to do so by an MP.</p>  
  
  <p>Although the proposed clause would give the Commercial Flights Officer the right to see <i>all</i> aviation information, his title supposedly limits his enquiries to <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-10-10a.62.1"> commercial flights</a>.</p>
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  I think this says it all in short form as a fair summary.  There's no need to say more.  
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)