HC Deb 29 April 1959 vol 604 cc1428-38

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. E. Wakefield.]

11.18 p.m.

Mr. Geoffrey de Freitas (Lincoln)

From red deer I should like to turn the attention of the House to Blue Streak and Black Knight. I want to raise tonight the subject of using military missiles for civilian space research.

Blue Streak and Black Knight are missiles which are being developed for defence and, when they are developed, they will be fired in Australia from time to time in training the R.A.F. My question is, "What plans are there for using these missiles during these firings as vehicles for launching satellites containing apparatus for scientific research in outer space?"

If there are no such plans, I would ask why there are not. In particular, I would ask the Government to set up a committee or group of scientists and engineers, directly responsible to the Ministry of Supply, for the purpose of carrying out such a project. If the Parliamentary Secretary tonight cannot give the House such an undertaking, then at least I hope that he will comment on this point and others which I am about to make and of which I have already given notice to the Lord President of the Council.

My first point is that of cost. Most people who have considered space research are very much alarmed and confused by the gigantic expenditure in the United States, where there is rivalry between the three Services and the civilian space administration, which has resulted in three or four different space projects with terrific waste and duplication of effort.

I have not heard anyone in this country seriously suggesting that we cart afford anything like those projects. I am suggesting a much more modest project costing between £10 million and £20 million, spread over the next five years. From what I can discover, that should be enough for a project involving the launching of about five satellites, each containing apparatus for about five different experiments. We must remember that these satellites are not expendable. Sputnik III has been going for a year, and is still broadcasting. I am thinking of British satellites weighing about a ton and acting as space laboratories for about ten years. It is important that the Goverment should make up their mind fairly soon. There is an enormous amount of preparatory work to he done, especially on instruments. That is I say on the cost.

My second point concerns the information that the satellite would provide. We must regard these satellites as laboratories in space doing three things: looking down towards the earth; examing what there is in space, and looking outwards towards the sun. As to what they should do, it is obviously ridiculous for us to try to duplicate what the Russians and the Americans are doing, but there is plenty of scope without overlapping.

For instance, we might well leave the moon to the Russians and the Americans. It has always struck me as a singularly uninteresting place, and I have not the inquiring mind possessed by Edmund Gosse's cook who, hon. Members may remember, wrote: O Moon, when I look at thy glorious face Careering along through the boundaries of space The thought has frequently come to my mind If ever I'll gaze on thy glorious behind. I think that we can leave the moon out of this.

We eliminate certain areas and certain subjects. One of the characteristics of our scientists has been their great success in selecting fields and subjects for study and research because, unlike the Russians and the Americans, their shortage of resources has made them think more and plan more. They have achieved wonders on very little, and because of inspired selection they have led in many fields. They are not asking for vast resources but for a modest opportunity.

There is plenty for the satellites to work on, even if we exclude the moon. There are certain fields of study with which we are particularly concerned and in which we have a especial tradition of study. I will mention only two and that under the heading of looking down towards the earth. First, there is looking down at the clouds. We need to know far more about the weather. Then, of course, there is the ionosphere to be studied. Ever since the discoveries of Sir Edward Appleton, British scientists have been in the lead in this field, and we should not prejudice our future achievements in it.

Incidentally, this particular field of pure science contributed greatly to radar, which every day guides aircraft and ships and which has saved countless lives. That is as good an example as I can think of where pure science paved the way for men—in this case, men including Sir Robert Watson-Watt and others—to develop practical equipment of great commercial value.

Another example which hon. Members may recall is the radio-active isotopes used in medicine. They came from advances in the study of nuclear energy. That only illustrates the point that we must not forget; that science does not work in watertight compartments but that what is learned in one compartment affects the others.

I have said something about the cost and something about the field of study. My third point, on which I should like some comment, is why I believe that we in this country should undertake this space project. For one reason, at very little cost it would offer a really thrilling challenge to our engineers. In engineering there is obviously the assembly problem so that the missile can be assembled for use as a vehicle for the satellites.

The devices which will be developed to set up our laboratories in space are certain to be valuable in solving technological problems on earth. Then, of course, there will inevitably be the development of the rocket for sending back photographic information from a satellite. Our industry is bound to learn new ideas from space engineering.

Another reason is that at very little cost—again I emphasise that—it will provide a sign that the Government are interested in opportunities for scientific and engineering research in one of the most stimulating fields of our time. If scientists are to be inspired they must see that this country is in the forefront of scientific research.

Since it is selection—and I emphasise that—and brains, not vast resources, which keep us in the forefront, there is every reason why even a modest programme will give us what we want in scientific prestige and thus encourage our bright young men to stay here and not emigrate to the United States where they have all the resources available.

Again at very little cost it would show that we take account of our industrial prestige. Last Sunday's Observer, in a leading article caricaturing the case for space research, equated prestige with a space man heading for Mars with a Union Jack painted on his space helmet. The Observer staff have obviously been reading too much science fiction. Prestige is much more than Jet Morgan and Union Jacks.

The problem is simply this. If for the first time since the Industrial Revolution we publicly contract out of one of the major engineering and scientific adventures of our time, then the Government will be serving notice that within a decade we shall have ceased to be among the leading industrial and technological countries. It will be the first step in a retreat. If the retreat continues, it is not too fanciful to say that in the 1970s and 1980s the Persian or the Peruvian who wants to order electronic equipment, computers or television, or anything in that field, will not look to this country as he does today. He may do so for tractors and ships, but for electronics and electrical equipment he certainly will not.

If that happens we shall be on the way to becoming one of the great "has beens" and shall be in danger in the lifetime of some of us of being forced to earn our living, and a poor living at that, dancing round the maypole to the delight of the Russian and American tourists who come to see our quaint folksy way of life.

I have said that this project would cost very little, but £10 million or £20 million is still a lot of money. It could build many hospitals, many houses and many roads. To those who say that we had better use the money on building hospitals, houses and roads and not on space research I would reply, of course I want hospitals and all the rest, but that 1 want them also in the 1970s and 1980s. Above all, I want to lay a firm basis for the country's wealth in the future. In the spring, we could always have more chips with our fish if we fried all the potatoes we had; but the wise man plants some of the potatoes in the ground so that in the summer he may harvest a crop. In other words, he looks to the future.

To sum up, we are spending millions and millions on developing certain missiles for defence. For between £10 million and £20 million, spread over five years, using these missiles, we could have a worth-while research project, with laboratories in space during the first critical decade of space study. As a country, our future depends on being among the leaders in modern technology. We cannot afford to tell the world that we are leaving this major branch of science to others. Industrially, we may not be a match for the two big giants, but we are still in industrial competition with Germany, France and Japan. We have a lead, and we cannot afford to lose it.

11.31 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply (Mr. W. J. Taylor)

I welcome this debate because it gives me an opportunity briefly to outline to the House what Britain has already done in this branch of research and to assure the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. de Freitas) and the House that the Government are giving active consideration to the question of this country engaging in an earth satellite programme.

The hon. Gentleman made some very pertinent points, but I do not think that he made any of which the Government are not already aware and which are not already under active consideration. I very much appreciate his courtesy in communicating his main points to my noble Friend the Lord President of the Council in order that I might have an opportunity to reply to them as fully as this particular debate will allow.

British activity in this field of space research began to take shape in the autumn of 1953 when the Royal Society considered the value and practicability of research into the upper atmosphere, which extends roughly to about 150 miles from the earth's surface. Outer space is the region beyond that. In April, 1955, five university groups started development work on experiments of their choice, and they have since been joined by a sixth. The Royal Aircraft Establishment undertook to develop rocket vehicles suitable for carrying these experiments, and. by agreement with the Australian Department of Supply, arrangements were made for the rockets to be launched at Woomera.

Early in 1957, the first trial flight of the rocket developed for this work, Skylark, took place. A series of 12 fully instrumented firings were started in the spring of 1958. A notable achievement was the launching of two Skylarks on the night of the International Geophysical Year World Day for Rockets.

Coming now to satellites, I want the House to be in no doubt about the magnitude of the effort which this country has already put into the tracking of the earth satellites launched by America and Russia and into analysing the data received from them. D.S.I.R. research stations at Slough and Singapore, the Jodrell Bank radio telescope, and some Ministry of Supply establishments did work which has been internationally acknowledged as very fine indeed.

In the observation of the first Russian satellite the data we obtained by radio, radar and optical methods was of the first quality. One of the very valuable results was new information about the shape of the earth. This country also made a valuable contribution to the study of air drag on satellites and its interpretation in terms of air density. Much progress has already been made in the study of radio propagation from the Russian satellites which will yield results of great importance for the understanding of ionospheric behaviour. This and much more has been Britain's part in the internationally agreed plan for the International Geophysical Year, and I must say that it was fulfilled to an extent beyond the most optimistic expectations.

I now come to the question which the hon. Gentleman posed, whether the United Kingdom should follow America and Russia into engaging in an earth satellite programme. As the hon. Member has pointed out, we already have the Black Knight research vehicle and the Blue Streak ballistic missile under development which could carry satellites into space. Naturally, in considering this big problem the Government have taken into account the possible use of these vehicles for this purpose.

We must remember, however, that first and foremost Blue Streak is part of a military programme of deterrence. The Government could not allow any other use to which it might be put to harm or delay this programme. Also, it is important that we should not over-simplify the problems involved in fitting a satellite into the nose of a missile. It is dangerous to assume that one can just stick it on top without having any effect on the functioning of the missile. I am sure the hon. Gentleman is aware of this, but there are many people who have not given so much thought to the matter as he has who may be misled into assuming that there is nothing very complicated in adding a satellite once the missile has been developed.

As my right hon. Friend told the House in reply to a Question last Monday, the Government are at present considering whether we should engage in an earth satellite programme. There is, therefore, no statement of policy which I can properly make at this moment. The hon. Gentleman has evinced some impatience that a decision has not yet been taken, but I do not offer any apologies at all that the Government are taking time to make up their mind in these important matters. It is not merely a question of marginal cost in addition to an existing military programme.

There are many other things to consider: for example, the scientific effort that would be required, the form the programme should take, and whether the scientific results could not be achieved equally well and more economically by co-operation with other countries. Merely to send up yet another satellite into orbit would be of little profit even in prestige. There is little point in starting a programme of research which merely repeats work already being done elsewhere.

The Government have, therefore, sought the considered views of the best scientific opinion in the country. These views have to be considered in a wider context than space research. There are few, if any, fields of scientific research in any country which are as well equipped as the workers in that field would like them to be. No country can afford to advance in every field of scientific knowledge at once, as the hon. Gentleman indicated in his speech. Before we decide on any considerable programme of space research we have to be satisfied that the return would be likely to justify the effort. The Government are considering in the light of advice received whether and in what way the United Kingdom should extend its research activities into outer space, and I hope that an announcement will be made very shortly.

I turn now to some of the specific points made by the hon. Gentleman in his speech. He suggested that the Government should set up a group of scientists and engineers, perhaps responsible to the Minister of Supply, to plan and carry out a satellite programme. I submit that consideration of how the programme should be managed must await a decision on whether we should have a programme at all and, if so, upon what scale.

With regard to cost, the hon. Member has hazarded a guess at the cost of a satellite programme over and above the expenditure on Blue Streak or Black Knight. He may be right; he may have been too optimistic. I do not want to argue about the figures when they must necessarily be so uncertain. Reliable estimates would not be possible until design studies had revealed much more of what was involved—for example, what form of guidance system a satellite should have. But before embarking on any expenditure the Government have to be quite sure that the money will be well spent if applied to this purpose. They have to try to gauge the worth of the results that can be foreseen from this kind of research and try to speculate on those that cannot be foreseen. This leads me to another of the hon. Member's points.

The hon. Member has suggested that the satellites should be designed as laboratories in space, working on experiments in pure science. I welcome this observation, for I am sure that it is in this context that the worth of an independent United Kingdom programme must be weighed. If the Government do decide to embark on an earth satellite programme, it will not be to show that this country can throw objects into orbit around the earth as accurately as anyone else. Rather it will be to add to the sum of scientific knowledge and to gain what practical advantages it can.

The hon. Member mentioned the question of what he called the challenge to our scientists and engineers, and expressed concern about the future this country had to offer them in this new and exciting age. The hon. Member may be in danger of confusing the means with the ends. It would not be a sufficient reason for a satellite programme that the Government should find something stimulating and exciting for some of our scientists to do. In any case, there are many other rewarding fields of scientific and engineering endeavour in this country. I need only cite the work we are doing in nuclear science and engineering. I do not think a satellite programme is so crucially important that the scientific well being of the country stands or falls by it.

Also, I do not think that the dangers of scientific emigration should be exaggerated. A certain flow in and out of scientists is positively desirable. In its 1956–57 report to the Lord President of the Council the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy found little evidence that an undue proportion of our better students were leaving the United Kingdom. In the following year the Council found no change to report in this situation. This question of scientific emigration is therefore nothing new. The effect on it of what we decide to do on space research should not be exaggerated. The value to the general health of our scientific effort of being engaged in such forward-looking work is much more significant.

The Government are naturally particularly alive to the possibilities of cooperation with Commonwealth countries. Many of them can contribute scientific expertise. Australia has the only rocket range in the southern hemisphere. But precise proposals for co-operation must await a decision by the Government whether or not to engage in a satellite programme.

There is and will continue to be great scope for international co-operation beyond the ties of the Commonwealth in this field. Scientists from many countries, including Russia, joined together last year to form the International Committee on Space Research, which goes by the short title of COSPAR. This is one of the fruits of the International Geophysical Year. COSPAR is an organisation of scientists, not of Governmental representatives, and was set up by the International Council of Scientific Unions. The United Nations Assembly has given much thought to the need for international co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer space. An ad hoc committee of the United Nations is likely to meet shortly to consider what action can profitably be taken at inter-governmental level. The British Government earnestly hope that the Soviet Union will decide to participate in the work of the ad hoc committee.

The subject raised by the hon. Gentleman is, as I have said, occupying the close attention of the Government at the present time, and I hope that he will not have to wait very long for much more information than I have been able to give him in this short debate.

Mr. de Freitas

I am grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary for what he has said. He has expressed the hope that I shall not have to wait very much longer. Can he say whether it is days or weeks or months before we are likely to have a decision announced in this House?

Mr. Taylor

I hope it will not be weeks or months.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at a quarter to Twelve o'clock.