HC Deb 13 July 1917 vol 95 c2285
26. Mr. LYNCH

asked whether the anti-aircraft guns of London can record a single hit to justify their existence; and whether radical changes will be made in the system of the guns themselves and in the higher command responsible for their service?

Mr. MACPHERSON

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The anti-aircraft defences of the United Kingdom are constantly being improved, but it is not in the public interest to state the manner in which this is being done. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative.

Mr. LYNCH

The question was not about anti-aircraft guns in the United Kingdom, but about the anti-aircraft guns of London, and whether they have a single hit to their credit.

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member has had an answer to that.

General Sir IVOR PHILIPPS

Is it not a fact that there is no sign from the ground that the anti-aircraft batteries are hitting the planes, and that very often a plane will be very heavily hit and not brought down, therefore is it fair to judge the action of the anti-aircraft batteries by the results that the public see from the ground?

Mr. MACPHERSON

Not at all.

Mr. PEMBERTON BILLING

If the aircraft is not brought down, how is it possible to prove that a hit was registered? Is it not a fact that the hit registered was not on an enemy machine, but on one of our own?

Colonel Lord HENRY CAVENDISH-BENTINCK

Go up and see for yourself.