HC Deb 28 February 1955 vol 537 cc1692-6
5. Mr. Wyatt

asked the Minister of Supply the nature and number of the modifications intended to extend the performance beyond that originally conceived which have been made to the Swift fighter, the Hunter fighter, the Valiant bomber, the Victor bomber, and the Vulcan bomber, respectively, since October, 1951.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

With regard to the V bombers, a number of modifications has been introduced since October, 1951, designed to extend their performance beyond that originally conceived. None of these has delayed production. It would certainly not be in the public interest to disclose their nature. With regard to the Hunter and Swift, there have been no such modifications of any significance since October, 1951.

Mr. Wyatt

How can the Minister say that if modifications are introduced to extend the performance beyond that originally intended that does not cause any delay in production, because obviously it must; and is not he aware that the firm building the Hunter has built a special workshop to deal with the modifications sent through by his Ministry?

Mr. Lloyd

With regard to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, the modifications in the case of the V bombers have been introduced at such a stage of the production process that they have not delayed production. In reply to the second part, I repeat that no modifications of any significance have been introduced for the Hunter and the Swift to extend their performance beyond that originally conceived. That does not mean that there have not had to be modifications, both for safety reasons and in order to bring up their performance to that originally conceived.

Mr. Beswick

Was not the Minister's first answer completely misleading, and was there not a major modification after October, 1951, to the dive brakes, which was decided upon after many of the aircraft had been produced? Why was it that the modification was delayed until so many of these aircraft were standing on the aerodrome?

Mr. Lloyd

My answer was not misleading. I was asked whether there had been any modifications intended to extend the performance beyond that originally conceived. It was that Question which I answered. If the hon. Gentleman wants to put down another Question on another point, I will answer it.

Mr. Wyatt

Is it not clear that the Hunter had a number of modifications made to enable it to fire with four guns instead of two? Was that not intended to extend its performance beyond that originally conceived?

Mr. Lloyd

The date I gave was October, 1951. The decision about the four Aden guns was taken before October, 1951.

6. Mr. Wyatt

asked the Minister of Supply when it was first realised by his Department that the Swift fighter Marks 1 to 3 would never be able to fulfil the rôle for which they were required; and what has been the total expenditure on the Swift in research, development, and purchase of aeroplanes for delivery to the Royal Air Force.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

It was decided earlier this month that these Marks could not be brought to a standard acceptable for operational use by the Royal Air Force. Expenditure to date on research, development and production on all Marks of the Swift totals about£20 million.

Mr. Wyatt

Is it not clear that there has been an appalling waste of money by the Government on the Swift—£20 million? Is it not also clear that an efficiently conducted Ministry would have realised much longer ago than one month that these Marks would not have come up to the standard required of them, and that an efficient Ministry would have realised that two years ago?

Mr. Lloyd

As to the amount of money spent on the Swift project, the Swift was ordered off the drawing board by the previous Administration—a calculated risk which, in the circumstances, I think they were right to take. As to the question whether the three Marks concerned should have been abandoned earlier, I think that is a matter we can easily debate later this week.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that a very large part of the£20 million spent was usefully expended in that it has led to considerable technical and scientific advances in aviation generally, whereas no part of the£30 million spent on groundnuts did anyone any good at all?

Mr. Wigg

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman be kind enough to tell us, as difficulties have been experienced with the Swift, how it comes about that spokesmen on behalf of the Government have promised in, I believe, 1952 and 1953, that they would be in squadron use? Would the Minister explain the reasons why those promises were given?

Mr. Lloyd

Certainly; because it was hoped up to a recent date that improvements would be made. The first representative Mark 4 did not fly until May, 1953.

Mr. G. R. Strauss

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman assure us that during the coming debates he will give us a full explanation why these quite intolerable delays have taken place in these aircraft? Will he give us a full explanation?

Mr. Wyatt

An honest one—

Hon. Members

Oh.

Mr. Lloyd

Certainly.

10. Mr. Wigg

asked the Minister of Supply when super-priority for fighter aircraft which he announced on 5th March, 1952, was extended to bombers; and whether he will make a statement.

Mr. Wigg

On a point of order. May I draw attention to the fact that originally this Question was put to the Prime Minister and, without my consent, it has been transferred to the Minister of Supply? It therefore needs to be amended to agree with the facts and ought to read "which the Prime Minister announced on 5th March, 1952" and not the Minister of Supply.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

I am grateful to the hon. Member for his correction. The super-priority scheme has included Canberra and Valiant bombers from its inception and was extended to the Victor and Vulcan in December, 1952.

Mr. Wigg

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that he has made a very grave statement? The Prime Minister informed the House that super-priority was being given to fighter aircraft. If the Minister will look at Hansard for 5th March, 1952, he will find that statement and, at no time from that date onwards, has any statement been made that super-priority was being extended to bombers, although there was an obscure reference by the Secretary of State for Air in the House of Lords in April, 1952.

Mr. Lloyd

In his statement, the Prime Minister was dealing with the fighter defences of this country. With regard to the question of super-priority to bombers, the hon. Member is perfectly correct; the Secretary of State did state that fact in another place on 3rdApril, 1952.