§ 35. Mr. Shinwellasked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what devices are now available to the Royal Air Force which can replace Anti-Aircraft Command.
Mr. WardIf the right hon. Member has in mind ground-to-air guided missiles, I can only refer him to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. de Freitas) last week.
§ Mr. ShinwellBut why has the hon. Gentleman assumed that I had in mind guided missiles? If it is intended to abolish Anti-Aircraft Command, what are the Government going to put in its place?
Mr. WardIf the right hon. Gentleman studies the remarks that were made by the Minister of Defence during the debate on the Motion for the Address last December, he will see that the reductions in Anti-Aircraft Command were not made because guided weapons had already arrived, but because long-range aircraft can operate at high speeds and altitudes, thus reducing the effectiveness of anti-aircraft fire.
§ Mr. ShinwellAre we to understand that the alternative to anti-aircraft guns, as regards both heavy and light, is the aircraft itself, and that the Government are not relying on guided missiles?
Mr. WardCertainly for the time being the answer is the very high flying manned fighter aircraft. When ground-to-air missiles come in, they should not be regarded as a replacement for antiaircraft guns but as an addition to the defensive power of our fighters.