§ 37. Mr. Shinwellasked the Secretary of State for War whether his Department have come to a decision on the efficacy of the instrument designed by Mr. R. H. Anderson of Bristol; whether appropriate investigations were undertaken to test it; and is he aware that the invention has been commended by the Royal Commission awards and by military experts?
§ Sir J. GriggThis instrument has been subjected to exhaustive tests which substantiated the inventor's claims. The possibility of adopting the instrument as an Army requirement has been carefully considered, but the scope for its useful employment is not considered sufficient to justify either the diversion of manufacturing capacity or the addition to the infantryman's already heavy load which its adoption would entail.
§ Mr. ShinwellWas the investigation of this instrument undertaken at night, for which it is particularly suitable, and is the right hon. Gentleman aware that an industrial firm has offered to embark on its production without any difficulty, and also that the Minister of Aircraft Production himself promised the inventor immediate investigation if he approached him?
§ Sir J. GriggThe inquiries I have made of the Ministry of Aircraft Production have established, at any rate, the fact that the invention could not be manufactured on any material scale without interfering with the production of bombers or calling for new productive capacity. The statement the hon. Gentleman has made seems to conflict with that, and I shall have to make further inquiries.
§ Mr. ShinwellMay I take it that the right hon. Gentleman has no desire to deprive the nation of such a valuable instrument, the efficacy of which has been established?
§ Sir J. GriggThat does not seem to me to arise. There are a great number of valuable instruments and devices for the waging of war. You cannot adopt them all, because of the limited amount of production capacity, and there is also a limit 764 to the amount of equipment that any particular unit can carry in connection with operations.