§ 23. Mr. Smallasked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how many nuclear physicists are employed at the Yarrow Research Establishment on marine nuclear propulsion.
§ 24. Mr. Benceasked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what research work is being carried out by his research agencies on marine nuclear propulsion; and how many nuclear physicists are employed by his research agencies.
§ Mr. C. Ian Orr-EwingThe figures requested would provide a useful guide to the amount of research and development effort we are devoting to this aspect of naval research. I cannot therefore believe it is in the public interest to give them.
§ Mr. SmallHas the Minister any intention of adding to the number? Does he propose to make a bigger contribution to ensure the maximum progress in this sphere of development, which is badly needed in Britain?
§ Mr. Orr-EwingThe number of nuclear physicists at Y.A.R.D. about which the hon. Member asks is not really a matter which we dictate. As long as Y.A.R.D. undertakes the programme which we ask it to undertake, it is for 435 Y.A.R.D. itself to distribute its personnel between the specialist and scientific branches. Our needs in this direction are being fully met.
§ Mr. BenceWould not the Minister agree that, with shipbuilding capacity now in excess of demand and with the steel industry working below full demand, it would be advisable to concentrate more scientists and nuclear physicists on the development of the propulsion of hulls by nuclear power, because the physical resources are now available which we have not had for 15 years? Will the hon. Gentleman do all he can to impress upon the shipbuilding industry and on his right hon. Friends the need to devote more of our physical resources to the evolution and development of nuclear propulsion, so that Britain may regain its position in the mercantile world?
§ Mr. Orr-EwingWe recognise the importance of all forms of research and development in the Navy. We are allocating a large slice of the Navy Vote to research and development. I will certainly bear in mind the points that hon. Member has made.
§ 27. Dame Irene Wardasked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what plans he has for the development of nuclear-powered warships, and, in particular, aircraft carriers; and what information he has sought, when studying this matter, regarding United States experience with the aircraft carrier "Enterprise".
§ Mr. C. Ian Orr-EwingThe Admiralty has no plans for the development of nuclear-powered warships, other than submarines, although research into nuclear propulsion for surface ships is continuing. The second part of the Question does not therefore arise.
§ Dame Irene WardIs my hon. Friend aware that it would give satisfaction to Great Britain, and, indeed, to many of our allies, if some of our ships with nuclear reactors could be sailing the world? Can he tell me why it should rest in the hands of the United States of America to demonstrate the results of their reactors? Have we not got better reactors and better ships? How long is it going to take us before we can do something? Is my hon. Friend aware 436 that at one time we were told that it would not be safe to have a ship with a nuclear reactor sailing the world? Yet it seems to be safe for Americans, and so it could be safe for us. Let us get on with it.
§ Mr. Orr-EwingIt is not a question of safety but a question of getting value for money and the most ships for the Fleet at sea. We can get better value because the capital costs and fuel costs and refitting costs of these surface ships are many times more than the costs for conventional ships.
§ Commander CourtneyDoes my hon. Friend foresee the embarrassment which is going to be caused to him and his Department by the fact that by the time these two nuclear submarines get to sea all the ratings in the submarines will be chief petty officers?
§ Mr. Orr-EwingI think that that is a very good advertisement for the rate of promotion in the Navy.