§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence (Mr. Nigel Birch)With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I should like to make a statement about responsibility for the operation of ground to air guided weapons.
The stage has now been reached when we can see that ground to air guided missiles have a very important part to play in the air defence of the United Kingdom. Development of these weapons is proceeding satisfactorily and arrangements must now be studied for their future introduction and operation as part of the air defence system. After full consideration, Her Majesty's Government have decided that the manning and operation of ground to air guided weapons will become the responsibility of the Royal Air Force.
This decision is based on the fact that these guided weapons will be complementary to fighter aircraft and operate in the same air space and must therefore be under the same ground control. Their introduction will be a gradual process. For many years to come Regular and Territorial anti-aircraft regiments will continue to carry out an essential part in our air defence system. These arrangements do not affect the responsibility of the Ministry of Supply for research, development and production.
§ Mr. A. HendersonIs the Parliamentary's statement intended to indicate that the ground to air guided weapon is not likely to be available for at least some years to come? If that be so, is it intended that Fighter Command shall have operational responsibility for all Regular and Territorial anti-aircraft batteries which up-to-date have formed part of Anti-Aircraft Command?
§ Mr. BirchThe statement that I have made indicates nothing about the timing, except that guided weapons are not now in service. What it does indicate is that 203 plans are being laid for their introduction into service. The relationship between Fighter Command and Anti-Aircraft Command remains exactly as it is at the moment.
§ Mr. HendersonI do not want to ask any embarrassing question, but the statement has been made by the Minister, in the presence of the Secretary of State for War, that for many years to come Regular and Territorial anti-aircraft regiments will continue to bear the main responsibility in this field of action. Is it not therefore reasonable to suggest that the time factor was introduced by the Minister into his statement? Is it not a reasonable inference from his statement that this weapon is not likely to be operationally available for some years to come?
§ Mr. BirchNo, I do not think that that is a reasonable deduction, for the simple reason that anti-aircraft guns of various sorts will be needed after the introduction of guided missiles.
§ Mr. HendersonMay I ask, therefore, whether the House can take it that this weapon will be available in the near future?
§ Mr. Ian HarveyWill my hon. Friend, in the light of that statement, undertake 204 to carry out with his colleague, the Secretary of State for War, a review of expenditure on existing anti-aircraft weapons to see if some economies can be made?