THE AIR ESTIMATES

HL Deb 29 April 1959 vol 215 cc1132-90

2.39 p.m.

LORD OGMORE rose to call attention to the Memorandum to accompany the Air Estimates (Cmnd. 673); and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, in rising to move the Motion in my name on the Order Paper, I should like first of all to welcome back to our proceedings the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, and trust that he has fully recovered from his indisposition. I must apologise to your Lordships in that if this debate goes on fairly late to-night, as it may do, I shall not be able to stay until the end. Your Lordships will remember that I had originally put this Motion down for a week ago and I had a very important conference arranged for to-night. When agreeing to postpone the Motion until to-day, I explained to the Government my difficulties. They fully understood, so I hope that your Lordships will forgive me if I am not able to hear the last speakers; but I shall, of course, read their speeches with much interest in Hansard.

We are to-day considering the Memorandum by the Secretary of State for Air which accompanies the Air Estimates for 1959-60, and by so doing we are considering an Estimate in a net total of £490,800,000, allowing for £2 million from the Federal German Government. This is a very large sum, and it indicates the great responsibilities of the Royal Air Force in these days and the high cost of equipment and manpower. It is interesting to note in the Memorandum that personnel costs amount to no less than 42½ per cent. of the Estimate, the other 57½ per cent. being made up of the requirements of works and lands, £26.1 million; petrol and oil £39.6 million; and aircraft and equipment £207 million, with miscellaneous items standing at £9.8 million.

Some two years ago Her Majesty's Government declared their policy with regard to defence generally and to the Royal Air Force in particular. As we understood it, the policy was then that there would be a strategic bomber force to carry megaton bombs and a fighter force consisting chiefly of English Electric P1B's to guard the bomber bases and the missile launching sites. This bomber and fighter force was to disappear as guided missiles became more plentiful and more accurate, and it was expected that this process would take about ten years. Needless to say, this revolutionary policy created consternation, followed by dismay, in the minds of the aircraft industry. It did not have the approval of any of the other major Powers, whether friendly or otherwise. The N.A.T.O. chiefs of staff expressly repudiated it, and the British chiefs of staff greeted it with the same enthusiasm as a Communist would expect to receive at a meeting of the Primrose League. It had a serious effect on officer and other rank recruiting, as can be seen at paragraphs 46 and 47 of the Memorandum; and noble Lords on both sides of this House protested against the policy, as may be seen particularly in the debates on the Air Estimates on May 7 last year.

Lately, however, I am glad to say that Government policy seems to be veering round, rather like some huge liner in narrow waters. There is nothing violent but there has been a steady veering round, so that now it appears that within the foreseeable future there will be a necessity for manned aircraft—and I am glad of it. If we in this House and those in another place have been able to influence Government policy, as I hope we have, then it is one more indication of the worth of Parliamentary democracy.

There is one point I should like to make which has been made before and which I think it is important to stress: that, irrespective of the balance of power between manned aircraft and missiles, there is a need for the highest calibre of manpower in the Royal Air Force and for the greatest possible morale. This is particularly important when we are dealing with units which are concerned solely with guided missiles. The cost—£150 million a year—of protecting the deterrent bases is not likely to go down as the years go by, and it has been suggested in some quarters that this calls for bases to be made mobile and elusive. That means, to a large extent, that the missile sites should in future be located not on land but at sea; and there is a hope of this, of course, with the new nuclear-powered submarine.

There are various points that I should like to raise arising out of the policy of Her Majesty's Government and the Memorandum which we are considering this afternoon. The first is the necessity for research and development. Your Lordships may remember that a good deal of the debate last year was concerned with this question; that is to say, to what extent could we expect the aircraft industry to pay for these very expensive works? Her Majesty's Government came round to the point that they felt it was essential that they should help in the research, but they did not come round to the point that it was equally essential that they should help with the development; and I believe they are still in that position.

I myself and many—perhaps most—of your Lordships feel the same this year as we did last: that when we are going into the supersonic field the cost of both research and development is so enormous that it is quite beyond the capacity of any private enterprise concern, whether engine manufacturers or airframe manufacturers, to meet, and therefore it is a matter in which Her Majesty's Government must take a hand. In particular, I am quite sure that there is urgent need for the Government to concern themselves with research and development on supersonic aircraft. In aircraft circles there is a demand that research shall be made into an all-purpose supersonic aircraft, one which can meet the requirements of the R.A.F. for bombers and fighters, of the Royal Navy. so far as it can be adapted to their purposes, and of civil aviation. Obviously, in this very expensive field we must concentrate our resources and see whether such an all-purpose machine can be achieved. Then there is the question of supersonic trainers. Obviously, if we are going into the supersonic field, as undoubtedly we shall, it is no good having a trainer of the old, conventional type; so I feel that Her Majesty's Government must consider the question of a supersonic trainer to train pilots of the future.

In this field there has recently been a report by the Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee, which is now with the right honourable gentleman the Minister of Supply. I hope that this Report will be available to your Lordships in due course, because undoubtedly its substance will be well worth considering and may give us a guide as to when, and how, these supersonic aircraft of the future may come into being. When we deal with supersonic aircraft it is as well to remember that in this field, as in all others, we are concerned with the struggle which has always gone on, whether at sea, on land or in the air, between the power of the offensive weapon and the defensive power of the particular machine or man with whom we are concerned. Previously an aircraft's defence was in its speed, height and manœuvrability, but now I am told that guided weapons, of the air-to-air type, at all events (though perhaps not to the same extent with ground-to-air weapons), are proving that at the moment there does not seem to be any defence against them from the aircraft. They are not yet perfected and that gives us some time in which to carry out research into the problem. either by some form of evasion or possibly by the creation of metals of a strength and type at present unknown.

I come now to overseas air bases and staging posts. As the range of aircraft become greater, the need for a large number of air bases and staging posts is not so great as it used to be, but we still require some; and unfortunately, owing to political difficulties in the Middle East, South-East Asia and elsewhere, the Royal Air Force has been squeezed out of a number of such bases and staging posts in strategic localities. This makes it all the more important that nothing should go wrong with the base and staging post at Gan, in the Maldive Islands.

On this score there have been a number of confusing and contradictory rumours, some of which have found their way into the Press. Answers to Questions in this House have not always relieved our anxieties on this matter. Your Lordships will remember that there have been stories of a revolt said to have been engineered, or at least supported, by a representative of the R.A.F. There have been rumours, or something more than rumours, of a famine; it was almost admitted that there had been a famine in the island. There have been rumours of an armed landing, of a Prime Minister being removed hurriedly by the Royal Navy and taken away to Ceylon—all the elements which would give wide coverage to a film from Elstree or Pinewood but which are certainly worrying when associated with the only R.A.F. staging post that there is, or is likely to be, in the Indian Ocean. We on this side, and no doubt noble Lords opposite also, would be glad to hear of the latest developments in this situation. We trust that nothing will be done which will in any way mean that this important staging post will be lost to the Royal Air Force. And the lack of staging posts also means that air refuelling is of greater importance than it ever was, and we hope the Government are proceeding with it.

Then I come to helicopters. In view of the contribution they have made in the past few years and their potentialities, I must regret that there are only two mentions of them in the Memorandum. One is almost an aside, to the effect that a Sycamore helicopter squadron was in Cyprus (paragraph 32), and a passing mention of air drops in Malaya (paragraph 37). I should like to know whether the Royal Air Force are paying sufficient attention to the development of the two-engined jet-propelled helicopter: to the Rolls Royce "flying bedstead" type, which, as your Lordships know, is not based on a helicopter principle; and to the Fairey Rotodyne, which possibly is the most attractive of all.

When the Government announced its policy of abandonment of manned aircraft within the foreseeable future, as a corollary the Royal Auxiliary Air Force was abandoned. I myself thought it was a great mistake at the time, and in the debate on the Air Estimates last year I said so and gave four reasons for my belief. Now that manned aircraft have had a reprieve, it is more than ever necessary that the Royal Auxiliary Air Force or, at all events, some squadrons of it should he restored. I am quite certain from all points of view—not least its link with the civilian population—that the Royal Air Force will live to regret their destruction of their very enthusiastic amateur younger brother.

Then we come to the Army Air Corps. I raised the question of this new force in the Air Estimates debate last year, and on all sides we wished it well. This is the Army's own air arm. The organisation came into being on September 1, 1957, and by an agreement between the Secretary of State for Air and the Secretary of State for War the responsibility for air reconnaissance and light liaison aircraft up to an all-in weight of 4,000 lb. was transferred to the War Office. I regret to say that things have not gone well with the Army Air Corps, through no fault of their own. Whether the Air Ministry, in colloquial language, "pulled a fast one", or whether it is a bit of inter-Service "gamesmanship", I do not know; but there do not seem to be any aircraft—or, at any,rate, there is only one —they can use. There is only one aircraft under the weight of 4,000 lb., so the Army Air Corps are in great difficulties. Their only aircraft is the Auster, which is not suitable for liaison work, only reconnaissance, and they have one helicopter, the Skeeter. So this Corps, which started off with the good wishes of your Lordships and which had such high promise, is reduced to these two—one tiny aircraft and one small helicopter—neither of which is suitable for one of its important rôles, liaison work.

Unless there is some explanation, I must say that I do not feel that this is the right way to treat a new arm. It is the traditional way of treating a new arm; it is what has happened in history. People always get rid to a new arm of those they do not want; they do not turn out any material or manpower they do want. It really is not good enough. I have not heard this from the Army Air Corps, but I cannot help feeling that they must be feeling rather hurt or rather depressed by the fact that they have not any aircraft with which to carry out their duties. I would ask the Government whether, as an interim measure, the Secretary of State for Air could not agree to the waiving of the weight limitation, so that the Army Air Corps can have at least one type of aircraft to carry out their liaison duties. It is not, I feel, asking very much for them.

My Lords, quite a number of noble Lords are going to speak to-day, and many of them, I am glad to say, have great experience in this field. There is just one whom I should like to mention, and that is my noble friend Lord Morris of Kenwood, who is to make his maiden speech. I am sure we shall all listen to him with added interest when we realise that until quite recently he was a Regular officer in the Royal Air Force. I am quite sure that your Lordships would not wish me to close what I have had to say to you without congratulating the Royal Air Force on the work which, as always, they have done so splendidly in the past year, often in very difficult circumstances, and wishing them all, both officers and other ranks, well in the year ahead. I beg to move for Papers.

2.57 p.m.

THF EARL OF SWINTON

My Lords, there is little that any of us, probably, would disagree with in the speech with which this debate has been opened, and certainly everyone on all sides of the House will endorse its closing sentences. The Royal Air Force have not, perhaps, had too easy a time, but they have, as always, risen to and above the level of great events.

It is convenient, I think, that we in this House have these detailed Service debates, following upon the general Defence debate, in which, whatever happens elsewhere, we manage to confine ourselves to the big defence problems. When we come to the detailed debates we can discuss the detailed problems of the Services, but always, of course, with the background of the defence policy which governs the policy of the individual Services and their programmes.

I want to say just a word or two about each of the Air Force Commands, and for convenience I shall follow the order in which they aredealt with in the Secretary of State's Memorandum. I have always been in favour of our developing and producing in the United Kingdom guided missiles, both long-range and short-range, mobile and static. I believe that all the arguments which have appealed to most Members, in both Houses, in favour of our producing the hydrogen bomb ourselves apply with even greater force to these guided missiles. I certainly do not propose—it is quite unnecessary—to repeat those arguments to-day. They have been deployed in this House by many of us in two recent debates; and what is indeed, I think, profoundly satisfactory in a matter of this kind is that it would appear that the leaders of both sides, the Conservative and the Labour Party Leaders, are in substantial agreement.

But, my Lords, whilst I think that is unquestionably true and right, do not let us underrate the importance of the strategic long-range bomber. As with aircraft, so—indeed, I think still more—with these newer weapons, development and production are both likely to be slower and to meet with more snags than the optimists would hope. Even if hopes are not dupes, however, and even if these new weapons come up, in time, production and performance, to the best estimates, I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, is right, andthat there will be a very long life, and for a very long time a need, for the strategic bomber. After all, the bomber has the enormous advantage of mobility. We all remember the argument in old days about whether it was better to have aircraft on an aircraft carrier or to have them on shore-based airfields; and there certainly was a preponderating view—not merely in the Air Force, but generally—that there was an enormous advantage in having our aircraft, whether it was fighters or bombers, shore-based. They could go up from one base, and, if that was bombed, they could come down on another; and, of course, the longer the range of the machine, the more airfields there were that were at its disposal. The aircraft carrier, on the other hand, in spite of its armament and its expensive escort, was a highly vulnerable target; and, if hit, even if not sunk, might easily be put out of action so far as the returning aircraft were concerned.

Of course, the aircraft carrier was a mobile thing itself: it could move a great distance and at a great speed, whereas the great guided missiles on which we are to concentrate in the future are completely static. They are bound to sit, and sit permanently, on one base. Even if, at enormous expense, the bases are put deep underground, they will still remain vulnerable, certainly in their communications; and I think it is idle to imagine, whatever security precautions are taken, that it will not be perfectly well known where these great bases are. The bomber, on the other hand, can move from base to base, as I have said: it can take off from one base and come down on another.

The bomber has another advantage: it is quite unlimited in its target. It can be sent anywhere. And there is the further great advantage that, with the remarkable developments of to-day, a bomb can be released at a great distance from its target. Further, it is possible to keep a proportion of this strategic force constantly in the air. Then the bomber has yet another great advantage: even if it has been started on an operation it is subject to recall and to diversion. It can be diverted, just as one can divert a ship at sea, by radio command. But, of course, once a guided missile has been launched fromits base, that is that—you have "had it". A further advantage is that the strategic bomber can be used, and has been used, as a tactical aircraft, and it can be a valuable auxiliary in the relatively minor operations which I think are much more likely to take place in different parts of the world than a great war. I therefore think that the long-range strategic bomber may live a life as long as many of us.

Then, of course (the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, rightly referred to this), there is the interaction in production, and particularly in development, of the civil and the military, which has been so often discussed here—and nobody has expounded it with more force than my noble and gallant friend Lord Tedder. I should like to reinforce the plea that we may, if possible, learn something, this afternoon about what are theplans for the development of a great supersonic civil aircraft. If this idea is to go forward—and there is a great deal to be said for it—the civil and the military development will be able to go forward hand in hand, each reinforcing the other, and at much less expense than if each were undertaken separately. So much for the bomber.

I need say little about Fighter Command, because I think that nobody challenges the need for fighters. So long as a potential aggressor has a bomber, we must have fighters. If we did not have fighters, then any old bomber would be able to get through. In fact, the fighters are as necessary to our defence as the ground forces of N.A.T.O.I wish I felt that I could agree—and I think I ought to say aword on this—with the noble Lord. Lord Ogmore, about the auxiliary squadrons. I have a great affection for them. For as long as they have existed I have had the honour of being an Honorary Commodore of one of them. They did excellent service during the war, and it went very much against the grain (as I say, I was a party to the original scheme) when we felt bound to abolish some of them. Frankly, we were very doubtful about the justification for keeping the otherson; and I could not dissent—as frankly told the squadron with which I was connected—when the Secretary of State for Air and the Government came to the conclusion that all of them must go. These squadrons did a wonderful job before and during the last war; but conditions were then entirely different.

In addition, there was the Volunteer Reserve, which was very valuable; but here there was time then to train the people. The war was going to last for quite a long time; and things were, of course, 'very different. Men learned to fly an aircraft which was not very different, if different at all, from the aircraft which they were going to fly in action. But now the aircraft are so different: and I believe that the aircraft of to-day requires the Regular, intensively trained pilot, who must be ready instantly to go into action.

Then there is Coastal Command. There is not very much in the Memorandum about that, and I hope that in this respect "No news is good news." I am sure that Coastal Command will remain an essential force, and I hope that the old controversy about whether it should be transferred is dead. As I said in the Defence debate, I am sure that what we want to-day is the maximum of co-operation and the minimum of friction. I certainly should be very sorry to see Coastal Command transferred: but, my Lords, I should be very glad to see a live Admiral, equally at home at sea and in the air, seconded to and in command of Coastal Command. I believe that co-operation, integration, on those lines is the way to work for the best results.

As to Transport Command, the programme has been increased. I am not quite sure from the documents how rapidly these transports are coining along. It is very desirable that they should be available as quickly as possible. We have now, and I hope we may have increasingly, mobile reserves in this country. Of course, the essential of a mobile reserve is that it should be mobile, and mobile both in men and in material. I gather that the policy of having equipment kept in a number of different places is being reversed and the number of places limited. It then becomes all the more important that Transport Command should be adequate to carry both men and equipment.

There is only one other subject I want to touch on, and that briefly—that is, supply. What I am going to say to your Lordships to-day is certainly no reflection whatever on the present Minister of Supply. I think, if I may be allowed to say so, that he is a keen and extremely efficient administrator and a man who would be an acquisition in any Government. It is not at all a question of personality. It is entirely a question of what is the right organisation; and I would ask again, as I have before: is a Ministry of Supply really necessary, or even desirable, to-day? The Services are contracting—I mean in the sense that they are getting smaller—including the Navy; but the Navy have very wisely kept the contracting for ships in their own hands. The normal principle that the user buys what he needs from the supplier not only is common practice in every field outside this, but surely is obvious common sense.

I think that anybody who has had anything to do with the equipment of the Air Force (I expect that this is true of the other Services, too, but certainly it is true of aircraft), knows that the direct contact of the development and operational staffs of the Air Ministry with manufacturers, from the start and all through, is of inestimable value. It is good both for the Air Staff and for the makers. It makes both of them realistic; it avoids misunderstandings and it avoids delays. To-day, with the delay in deciding which aircraft are to he developed and produced, with the difficulties which are encountered in these complex machines, so that an aircraft almost begins to be obsolescent by the time it gets into the squadrons, time is of the essence of the contract.

Sir Winston used always to be hunting the Service Ministries about the proportionate number and size of the "teeth" and of the "tail," as he used to call them. There is no doubt that the teeth are fewer—I hope and believe that they are sharper. In supply, the tail always seems to get longer; certainly it does not get any shorter. But it is not only that. There are three tails. There is the Ministry of Defence as well as the Ministry of Supply and the Air Ministry, and—I do not think that this is any secret—this is a trinity which is not always in unity. I really think that this subject requires reconsideration, and I very much hope that the Prime Minister will give it a new look and a thorough look, when he comes back to power after the General Election.

3.15 p.m.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, first of all I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, for the kind personal remarks he made about me, and for his courtesy in postponing this debate while I was unfortunately absent from your Lordships' House. I understand that he will not be able to be here at the end of the debate, and I will try to answer, either in the course of my speech or separately, the questions he has put to me. I should also like to identify myself with the opening words of the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, and thank the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, for the manner in which he opened this debate.

I think your Lordships will all agree that nowadays it is inevitable that any Service debate must be interlinked with defence as a whole. Therefore much of what in the old days would have been dealt with in Air debates has been mentioned and dealt with in the Defence debate we had before Easter. I will try not to cover old ground and weary your Lordships with a mass of repetition. Apart from answering the questions noble Lords have put to me, I should like to deal with some of the main points brought out in the Memorandum and in the Estimates. I shall be dealing first, with the R.A.F. contribution to the deterrent; secondly, with the part the R.A.F. are playing in cold war, and could play in any limited war; and last, but by no means least, with the present recruiting situation.

As regards the first point, during the past year the Victor has come into squadron service, and the build-up of Victor squadrons is going ahead in conjunction with the new Vulcan squadrons. As increased numbers of these aircraft come into service, they will gradually replace the Valiants, which up to now have formed the main element of the V-Bomber force. Later on, the improved Marks of these machines will be arriving and will be fitted with power bombs. These have already been tested aerodynamically and there have been successful test launchings with models. During the coming year the test launching offull-scale weapons will be started. The power bomb will, in a sense, give us the advantages of both the bomber and the missile: the flexibility of a manned aircraft combined with the ability to attack from outside a heavily defended target area.

At the same time, the development of flight refuelling will give the bomber a much-increased range which, of course, will allow deeper penetration into any potential enemy territory and also give a much wider choice of routes to any particular target, thus increasing the problems of defence. I am glad to tell your Lordships that meanwhile a number of Valiants have already been fitted as tankers and there are plans for fitting more.

Nevertheless, the increased effectiveness of the deterrent is not only a question of advances in equipment. We are also steadily cutting down the time it takes to get an aircraft into the air, thus lowering the risk of these aircraft being destroyed on the ground. At the moment the standard time for a squadron to get four aircraft airborne is six minutes. When the Prime Minister visited Cottesmore the other day he was given a demonstration at which the timing was cut to under four minutes. I think all your Lordships will agree that that is an extremely good demonstration and we hope that it will become standard.

Both noble Lords who have spoken already have stressed the value of the manned bomber. I would say on behalf of my right honourable friend the Minister that it will undoubtedly remain the main contribution to the deterrent for many years to come, though, of course, as these new missiles are perfected they will play an increasingly important part, and in the transitional period will help to diversify the form of the deterrent. The Thor missile is at present being employed here only for training. I feel that sometimes people are apt to underestimate its value for this purpose. The crews receive their basic training in the United States at the expense of the United States Government, but beyond this there is a need for continuous squadron training in handling procedures and in operating the complex ancillary and supporting equipment. Moreover, experience with weapons on our own sites is a great asset in working out servicing schedules and in assessing establishments. The trials at Cape Canaveral are going ahead extremely well. The first launching by an R.A.F. crew, as your Lordships may know, took place early this month. When the trials are completed fairly shortly the necessary modifications will be made and Thor will become part of the deterrent set-up.

Looking a little further on, development is going well on the Blue Streak. Here we can, of course, profit from the experience we gain with Thor. As I think was explained in some detail by the Minister in the Defence debate in another place, the Blue Streak will be a liquid-fuel, single-stage rocket. The development of a liquid fuel rocket has many important implications in regard to capacity for the various devices which may he needed for counter-measures. The weapon will in fact be intermediate between the single stage American Thor, to which l have just referred, the Jupiter and the multi-stage intercontinental ballistic missiles, which the Americans will require, but which we, because of our geographical position, will not.

Over the whole field with which I have dealt, so far, I can say that we are working in the closest co-operation with our Allies; and I think your Lordships will agree, particularly in a matter such as this, that that is vitally important. There is close planning liaison and a steady interchange of techniques with Strategic Air Command. V bombers are being assigned now to the Supreme Allied Commander Europe for tactical work in replacement of the Canberras at present allocated for this task, thus providing an increase in the hitting power of the squadrons and of their all-weather capability. The United States Government is meeting a major part of the cost of the Thor programme: it is, in fact, providing the weapons and paying for the basic training of the R.A.F. crews in the United States. Our initial contribution is limited to the cost of constructing the sites and of certain ancillary equipment. These are only a few of the many examples of the close co-operation that is going on all the time between ourselves and our Allies in the various pacts.

Before I leave this part of my speech, I should say a few words about the important role that Fighter Command is playing in maintaining the validity of the deterrent.

THE EARL OF SWINTON

Before the noble Earl passes from the bomber, is he going to say anything about the development of the supersonic aircraft?

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

I am obliged to the noble Earl. I have one or two separate notes on what the noble Earl and the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, asked, and I propose to deal with those at the end of this speech. As is known. it is impossible to provide an effective 100 per cent. air defence of the country, as a whole, but it does not follow that the defence of air bases does not add to the difficulties of destroying the deterrent. Air defence of the bases is in fact complementary to the precautionary readiness measures which I have already mentioned. Fighters and guided weapons will both he needed. The latter provide a highly effective defence of such targets as air fields, while the fighter has the vital task of preventing hostile reconnaissance in times of tension, and of preventing large-scale radar jamming in the event of war.

This year we shall see two important developments in our all-weather Javelin force: our first operational air-to-air missile the Firestreak, and the introduction of the Javelin 8 which has a re-heat engine which gives an improved climbing rate and a higher operational ceiling. In conjunction with these developments in the manned fighter force, I can tell the House that good progress is being made in fitting surface-to-air guided weapons into our air defence system, and towards the solution of such problems as the allocation of targets between the two types of weapons —that is, surface-to-air guided weapons and the fighter—and the control of air space to allow the two to operate together. The first large-scale trial took place last autumn, and I understand was extremely successful.

I mentioned in my opening remarks that I would say a word on the value of the Royal Air Force in the cold war. Its contribution, of course, comes about largely from our membership of the three main pacts—that is, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the South East Asia Treaty Organisation and the Baghdad Pact. The Royal Air Force is continually taking part in combined exercises with all the other air forces of the free world who are members of these Treaties or Pacts. I understand that there is hardly a week goes by when a V-bomber does not visit somewhere like North America, the Middle East or the Far East. Though this is routine training, it is also an extremely valuable way in which to carry out good will and liaison visits, and by that means build up friendship and confidence. I understand that at the present time some Shackletons of Coastal Command are visiting the Caribbean. Again, a large number of officers from other countries frequently attend our training courses here. There are also schemes for loaning and interchanging officers with officers of other Commonwealth and foreign air forces, which I am sure your Lordships will agree is of great value to the whole organisation.

Now, my Lords, I will say a few words upon recruiting, and then I should like to answer one or two of the specific questions put to me by the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore. I want to deal particularly with air crew. Cranwell is going reasonably well. Recruiting for air crew as a whole was disappointing, although I understand that it has shown some improvement in the last twelve months. I think that, as the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, said in his speech, it got into the minds ofsome people that the bomber would become completely obsolete; and that may have frightened off some people in initial recruiting drives.I think it has now been sufficiently said, not only by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Air, but also by the Minister of Defence and the Prime Minister himself, that the manned aircraft will be needed for many years to come. Perhaps I may turn now to the particular points about which I have been asked.

The noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, asked me what research was being done in regard to the supersonic all-purpose aircraft, a matter mentioned also by the noble Earl, Lord Swinton. And both noble Lords referred to the recommendations of the Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee. There is, I understand, a recommendation for detailed design work for a transatlantic aircraft which could cruise at twice the speed of sound, and also for a smaller aircraft cruising at about 1.2 times the speed of sound. These recommendations are being examined by the Government and the Royal Air Force, and are receiving the closest study. Meanwhile of course a great deal of work on supersonic flight is being done in relation to specific R.A.F. aircraft. The Lightning has, in fact, already flown at around twice the speed of sound.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, before the noble Earl leaves that point, would it be possible for this Report of the Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee to be made available to noble Lords in this House in the near future?

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

I will certainly make inquiries and let the noble Lord know: I cannot tell him off hand. As I was saying, the Lightning has already flown at around twice the speed of sound. The T.S.R.2 will also be a supersonic machine. The lessons gained from the development of these aircraft will be of the greatest assistance in any project of the kind recommended by the Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee.

The noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, also asked me about supersonic trainers. I am glad to be able to tell him and the House that there is a two-seater trainer version of the English Electric Lightning ordered as a training plane in conjunction with the fighter. A further question put to me by the noble Lord concerned development of a staging post on the Maldivian Island of Gan. I am afraid that I cannot give the noble Lord much information on that matter. I understand that work is going ahead, but since this is subject to negotiations by my noble friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and not by the Air Ministry, I am not at the moment in a position to say much more than that work is actually proceeding.

THE EARL OF SWINTON

Before my noble friend leaves that point, can he say, which I understand is the fact, that it is utterly and entirely untrue that any personnel of the Air Force were in any way concerned in stirring up trouble in the Islands?

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, I am fully cognisant of what the noble Earl says.

VISCOUNT STANSGATE

My Lords, could not the noble Earl ask the Minister to give us a clear statement about the Maldive Islands, because it is not at all clear to the ordinary newspaper reader what is happening or what are the wishes of the legitimate Maldive Government.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, I think it is fair for me to defend myself by saying that we are discussing the Air Estimates and that that question is rattier wide of the mark. If the noble Viscount likes to put down a Question or a Motion on that subject, it can be answered or debated through the Departments that are responsible.

The noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, also asked about the development of twinengined jet helicopters. This is looking somewhat far into the future; but research is going on, and the Ministry of Supply, to which the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, devoted part of his speech, are active in this matter. I am afraid that I am unable to give the noble Earl the answer to what the Prime Minister's views are in regard to the future of the Ministry of Supply; and I feel that this also is slightly wide of a debate on a subject such as this; though it might well be the subject of a separate debate. The noble Lord also asked about the Army Air Corps. The weight limit was laid down after a considerable amount of discussion and study, but I have no doubt that my right honourable friends, the Secretary of State for Air and the Secretary of State for War will take note of what the noble Lord says: in fact I believe the question is still being discussed.

The final question which the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, asked me was about the Royal Auxiliary Air Force. I would join with him and the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, in their comments; and I know that it was a tragic decision which my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Air, who was himself an auxiliary airman, had decided to make when he abolished it. If any means could be found (and the nobleEarl, Lord Swinton, spoke about this point in great detail), I know that it certainly would be one of the fondest wishes of my right honourable friend to reintroduce the flying squadrons of the Royal Auxiliary Air Force. At the moment, however, it seems that it is not possible. But I know my right honourable friend has the greatest sympathy with what the noble Lord has said, and if at any time it became practical I am quite certain that the matter would be reconsidered. At the moment it seems that I cannot offer your Lordships much hope that anything will be done.

My Lords, I have done my best to give a broad outline in explanation of the Memorandum and to answer the questions which the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, asked me. If noble Lords raise any subsequent points that I have not dealt with already, in far too long a speech, I will, with the leave of the House attempt to reply to them at the end of this debate.

3.45 p.m.

LORD MORRIS OF KENWOOD

My Lords this is the first time that I have had the privilege of speaking in this House, and I would therefore ask your Lordships' kind indulgence. My brief remarks will be concerned with recruitment into the Royal Air Force, since this is a subject on which I can speak with some personal knowledge, having, as my noble friend Lord Ogmore said, recently left the Royal Air Force.

As your Lordships are already aware, general recruitment into the R.A.F. is up to the level which had been hoped for, although there is still a shortage of volunteers for training as pilots and navigators; and it is this branch of the R.A.F., the General Duties Branch, upon which I should like to enlarge. First of all, the young man, with the aid and advice of his parents and his schoolmaster or careers master—and I cannot stress too strongly the influence which those persons can and do exert—must weigh up the pros and cons of a career in the General Duties Branch of the R.A.F. as opposed to a civilian career.

Should he choose the latter, he can reasonably expect employment up to the age of 60 or 65 and then a pension related directly to his salary. Should he, however, choose the R.A.F.—and the problem is the same for all the Services, although at the moment we are discussing the R.A.F.—he is faced with a serious difficulty. The term "full career" as at present applied to the General Duties officer is a misnomer, since the career is by no means full. Unless he reaches the higher ranks—and very few men will—he is faced with the prospect of compulsory retirement at the age of 43, If he has reached the rank of squadron leader, or 47 if he is a wing commander. At this stage he has to find other employment without having any qualifications, other than a general knowledge of administration together with his flying qualifications. The latter are of no assistance in civilian flying, since the airlines are not normally interested in air crew over the age of 25. This retiring age is, of course, the age at which his responsibilities for such things as his childrens' education are at their highest, and the chances of obtaining employment at a salary which will enable him to maintain the standard he has reached are very slim indeed.

When the recruit joins the R.A.F. under the Direct Commission Scheme, as opposed to entry through Cranwell or the universities, he has the right, once he has been commissioned and receives his flying badge, of choosing either to serve for twelve years or, alternatively, to receive a permanent commission on the Supplementary (Flying) List. This means that he will be guaranteed a pension at the end of his service, but also that he will be faced with limited promotion prospects to the rank of wing commander, although it is unlikely that he will get beyond squadron leader. However, at the end of his service he may apply for an extension, and, subject to the approval of the Air Council, he may be permitted to serve until the age of 50 or 55. After the officer has been commissioned for about two years, and provided that he is under the age of 27, he may apply for a permanent commission on the General List, with the possibilities of promotion to the higher levels but also with the prospect of compulsory retirement, as I have already outlined. We appear then to be faced with an anomaly: an officer who has the ambition towards high level promotion is apparently penalised by being forced to retire at an earlier age than his contemporary who has a Supplementary (Flying) List Commission.

As your Lordships know, the modern aircraft is a highly complex, expensive piece of machinery, and the profession of flying demands along and comprehensive training. This, in turn, demands from the recruit a high standard of intelligence, education, enthusiasm and initiative, and in order to attract this type of young man, who tends to-day to look ahead with an eye on security in the future, he must be assured of a full career in the real sense of the word. He does not have that assurance at this moment, and I can tell your Lordships, from conversations I have had with various R.A.F. officers, that this question of compulsory retirement at a comparatively early age is a barrier to the recruitment of suitable candidates for aircrew.

The answer must lie, therefore, in the revision of the career structure, and I should like to remind your Lordships of certain passages in the Grigg Report, which has already been discussed in your Lordships' House on a previous occasion. The Report says: In so far as it is possible, officers should be employed to ages which are normal for retirement outside. This means keeping them until something like 60. Whilst I do not disagree with 60 as a suitable age for retirement I would suggest that 55 would be more appropriate, in order to bring the retiring age into line with that of the officer with a Supplementary (Flying) List commission.

The Report goes on: Later retiring ages should not deprive the officer of his present right to leave the Service early. Indeed, there are arguments for making it easier for officers to seek civil employment in their late 30's or early 40's. One way to do this would be to remove the present penalties on pension entitlement which attach to voluntary premature retirement, and (if necessary) to reduce the minimum qualifying period for retired pay. On this latter point, I should like to give your Lordships an example which concerns the university graduate. Much encouragement is given to the graduate to enter the Services, and the average age at which he would do so is 22. Assuming that the graduate had reached only the rank of squadron leader he must retire at the age of 43. In order for a squadron leader to qualify for full grant and retirement pay, he must have completed 22 years commissioned service after the age of 21. This means, of course, that it is impossible for the graduate to complete the qualifying period, and therefore he cannot receive the full terminal emoluments.

The noble Earl, Lord Selkirk, in his reply in that debate said—and I quote: We cannot pretend that we need a large number of older people in the Armed Forces, for we do not. This is, and always will be, essentially a young man's sphere. That means that the majority of men cannot have a full career. Whilst I agree in principle with the noble Earl that this is the case at present, I would suggest that it may not be necessarily the case by the time the young pilot or navigator of to-day reaches the present retiring age, which will be in about 20 to 25 years time. We can expect by that time to be approaching the so-called "push-button" era, when the need for experience is more important than the need for youth, and when the majority of aircrew are needed for transport aircraft and the like. One has only to take the civil airlines as an example to realise that the average age of senior transport pilots is far higher than that of the present-day fighter and bomber pilots. The noble Earl went on to say that the Government were examining the possibility of making service shorter for some, with earlier retirement, and of allowing a certain number of others to serve longer. Whilst in no way trying to minimise the difficulties involved, may Iconclude, my Lords, by urging Her Majesty's Government to give this matter their most urgent consideration in order to remove the doubts which to-day are affecting recruitment.

3.56 p.m.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, it is never a pleasure for me to follow any noble Lord in this House. But in so far as it is a pleasure, it is a very real one for me to follow the noble Lord who has just sat down, because it falls to me to congratulate him upon a fluent, knowledgeable and most valuable maiden speech. I took the plunge myself not so very long ago and I know how intimidating it is; but any intimidation which the noble Lord may have felt was quite superfluous. It is indeed a very real pleasure for me, on behalf of your Lordships, to express the hope that we shall often have the pleasure of hearing the noble Lord in this House.

Although your Lordships have been debating the Air Estimates, your Lordships' feet have been pretty firmly on the ground hitherto. I hope that you will forgive me for a short period if I put your Lordships, metaphorically, into orbit. I have been in two minds whether to inflict the subject of space upon your Lordships again, partly because it is a highly technical subject and I have no technical or scientific pretensions, and partly also because I was not quite certain whether it was strictly relevant to your Lordships' debate this afternoon, but I have decided that it might be, in view of two sentences generously accorded in the Air Estimates to the missile programme. But if I do stray from the straight and narrow path this afternoon, I hope your Lordships will not call me too severely over the coals—or should I say 'eckle me?

Be that as it may, I feel that this subject merits your attention. It is one of great intrinsic importance, and it is also, I understand, one to which the Government is at present giving close attention. It is relatively easy, even for an amateur, to summarise the importance of space research. Quite simply, it offers to our human race one of the great revolutionary advances in the knowledge of man and of man's environment. There are, I think, few branches of scientificknowledge—whether it be astronomy, biology, chemistry, meteorology or physics—to which research in outer space cannot make a really vital contribution. I shall not weary your Lordships or confuse myself, with examples. But I should just like to mention the fact that the Minister of Supply confirmed in another place on Monday that those Fellows of the Royal Society whom he had consulted had confirmed the importance and usefulness of space research. Your Lordships may also have read the recent article in the Sunday Times by the former Astronomer Royal, in which Sir Harold Spencer Jones expressed the view that space research might well provide a useful clue to the origins of life itself.

The importance of space research, of course, does not lie exclusively in the field of pure science. Our American allies are, I think, already spending on this research alone a sum almost as much as the total of the Estimates which we are debating this afternoon. Soon they, and without doubt the Russians too, will be spending a great deal more. The impulse behind this vast expenditure is not purely scientific or platonic. It is also military. In this context, I should like to quote once again to your Lordships the words of General Gavin. I do so because this opinion is the considered view of one of the best and most authoritative military thinkers in the free world. These again are his words: Of one thing we can be sure. The nation that first achieves the control of outer space will control the destiny of the human race. It is, of course, one thing to agree on the theoretical importance of space research. It is quite another to argue as a matter of practical politics, especially in an Election year, that we in Britain should go seriously into the space business. I personally believe that we should, and as a matter of priority. My reasons are these. In the first place, we have played, over the last 500 years or so, quite a large part in extending the frontiers of human knowledge. I do not see why on this occasion we should opt out. Secondly, we as a nation live by our industrial wits. We cannot make our way in the world unless our industry rests on an advanced technology. I do not believe that our technology will remain really advanced if we deliberately exclude ourselves from this area of research.

I have already mentioned some of the theoretical implications of space research, but the surprising thing about even the purest scientific research is that in the long run it has a funny way of paying off in its industrial applications. Moreover, the penetration of outer space poses quite unique engineering problems. Their solution, will, in turn, demand striking advances in many fields of engineering—in metallurgy, electronics and rocketry, to name but three. It is true, of course, that knowledge of the scientific data gained from space research andof the engineering techniques necessary to gain that data may be passed on to us by our American friends, or the Russians. But again it may not; and knowledge borrowed at secondhand is very different from knowledge won at first hand.

There is also, and above all, the human factor. We need to hold in this country every good scientist and every good technician that we have. Because of the lack of a British space research programme we have already lost some to America. Moreover, we do not need only to keep the technicians we have; we need to create more. That need is very well recognised by Her Majesty's Government. But the young scientist or the young engineer is not necessarily formed at fifteen or twenty; he is often born at five or ten years. Nowadays, astronautics(as I believe it is termed), occupies in the minds of the young the place which aeronautics occupied twenty years ago. A glance at the younger Press confirms this. I spent part of yesterday afternoon in your Lordships' Library, spellbound by the adventures of Don Dare on his safari in space in his Galactic Galleon. One may smile at space fiction, but I believe that it is closer to reality than some of us may suppose; and, above all, it shows that to the younger generation space represents the glamour and adventure of science. I do not believe that we should have in this country enough good scientists had we not, in the nineteenth century, played our full part in the development of the railroad, or, in the early twentieth century, our full part in the development of the aircraft. By the same token I believe that British science will suffer if we do not play our part in astronautics in the latter half of this century.

It may, of course, be objected that what we can contribute to space research is too little and that we are already too late to make a really useful contribution in this field. This view is quite understandable. There are already half a dozen or so satellites, American and Soviet, in orbit, and by June of this year, I believe, there will be an American satellite in orbit round Venus; and by 1961 the Americans plan to have embarked on their programme of manned flight into space. It is perhaps a commentary on the mores on the other side of the Atlantic that the seven volunteers are all married men!

Nevertheless, I believe that the view that we are too little or too late in this field is wrong. I myself hope that our space research programme, if it comes, will be confined to the scientific sphere, to the non-military sphere. If so, much of the cost will fall away at one blow. Moreover, we have shown by our development of the Black Knight that we can develop an extremely efficient high-level rocket at comparatively low cost. Finally, I have been told, on what I have taken to be good authority, that if we could devote, say, £20million a year—about one-twentieth of the present Estimates—to space research we could make a really important contribution in this field.

So much, my Lords, for the "too little" argument. As for the "too late" view, I can only say that there is plenty of room in space. The area is so great, and the avenues of scientific exploration there so inexhaustible, that I suspect there will be plenty of scope for us, even if we arrive there a little later than the Americans or the Russians. But I feel that the success of any programme on which we may decide to embark will be governed very greatly by two factors. The first is that of will and organisation; the second is the factor of co-operation. At the moment, there is, I suspect, a great reservoir of knowledge and enthusiasm on this subject lying untapped in this country; in Government Departments, in the universities, in industry and in research establishments. I trust that if Her Majesty's Government decide, as I hope they will, to embark on a space research programme, they will take energetic steps to harness and co-ordinate these latent energies. I hope, too, that the organisation they decide to give to this programme will be such as will impart real drive and generate real enthusiasm.

But personally I attach even more importance to the factor of co-operation. I trust that any future British programme of space research will not be conceived in arty narrow national spirit. On purely practical grounds we shall be able to do much more if we co-operate with other countries over this matter. Apart from that, it would be really too idiotic if we were to project the parochial rivalries of the nation-State—an obsolete concept, even on our own planet—into the remote recesses of outer space.

If we decide to opt for co-operation —and I hope that we shall do so—the obvious first step, in my view, is co-operation with and within the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth countries have a valuable contribution to make in this field in their reserves of scientific manpower, in their industrial resources and in certain cases in their geographical position. The value of Canadian participation is obvious; and also that of Australia. But perhaps less obvious is the value which South African or Indian co-operation would have. I am told that Cape Town would be an ideal base to support a satellite space-launching programme on a Commonwealth basis in the Antarctic, and India can call on the brains of some of the most eminent high-altitude scientists in the world. I myself feel that the value of a joint Commonwealth venture in this sphere, especially if it were to comprise the new Commonwealth countries, would be more than purely utilitarian. Every day we witness some erosion of the old, and tangible symbols of Commonwealth, like Imperial preference. Perhaps the imaginative association of the Commonwealth countries, old and new, with a joint project of this nature would give a new and tangible impulse to the concept of Commonwealth.

I do not feel, however, that a project of this nature should be confined to the Commonwealth, although I think that is where we might start. I notice that the French Government are embarking on a space research programme. Since I hope that we shall ourselves, I wish them well. Yet it would be an absurdity if we and the French, and then the Germans and Italians and Dutch, and so on, were each to paddle their own separate space canoes. Clearly, on political as well as practical grounds, the Commonwealth and Western Europe should get together, and at the start, over this matter. But, of course, this is not all. One day space research will have to be conducted on a truly international level. Therefore I trust, too, that we shall continue to participate actively in the International Committee on Space Research and in the consideration by the United Nations of this problem.

To sum up, I am very glad to learn that the Government hope to make an early and full statement on this matter. It is overdue. I only hope that the announcement, when it comes, will make the following points clear. First, that we have decided to embark on a space research programme designed to serve scientific ends. Secondly, that any such programme will be conceived on a sufficiently ambitious scale; that sufficient funds will be made available, and that sufficient priority and drive will be imparted to make it really worth while. Thirdly, that the keynote of any British programme will be co-operation, first with the Commonwealth countries and thereafter with Western Europe, with the international bodies with which the Americans and the Russians are already associated, and finally under the ægis of the United Nations.

4.13 p.m.

VISCOUNT CALDECOTE

My Lords, I should like to offer my humble apologies to the House for not being in my place earlier in the debate, but a previous engagement and the postponement of the debate from last week made it very difficult for me to be here. I must also declare an interest in the subject of this debate. It is just two years since the important White Paper on Defence of 1957 was published. The policy at that time has had far-reaching effects on all the three Services, and to-day we have the first real opportunity of reviewing the development of the R.A.F. under that new policy.

The Memorandum presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Air is, I think, an excellent document. It shows clearly the progress that has been made over these past few years. Overall, the picture presented is, I believe, encouraging. It shows a proud Service steadily recovering from the shock of the severe blow it received in1957; for, however wise were the intentions of the 1957 White Paper(and there was much wisdom in it), those intentions were unhappily presented and they caused harm to the R.A.F. That it has survived as an efficient Service, with steadily rising morale, reflects, I believe, the greates possible credit on the Air Council, and particularly on the Chief of the Air Staff, who has led the Service with such courage and foresight through these very difficult days. The whole country, as well as the R.A.F., owes a great debt of gratitude to Sir Dermot Boyle, and when he retires at the end of this year I sincerely hope that his talents will not be lost to the service of the nation. Such distinguished and effective work as he has done reminds us once more that, even in these days of missiles and satellites, a Service is no better than the men in it, and that technology and science are no substitutes for courage and leadership.

In some respects the manpower situation of the R.A.F. has improved. Appendix E in the Memorandum shows that the trough of recruitment in 1957 has passed and, perhaps even more important, that an increasing proportion of recruits are signing on for nine years or more. That has already had an effect on the composition of the strength of the R.A.F., as is shown in Appendix D; for, excluding National Service men, 65 per cent. of the airmen strength are on engagements of nine years or more in 1959, compared with only 27 per cent. in 1953, the actual numbers having increased from 45,000 to 79,000.

Anyone who has served in Her Majesty's Forces knows how tremendously important that is, for the backbone of any Service is the experienced noncommissioned officer. Without a substantial element of long-service engagements these N.C.Os. are simply not available in sufficient numbers. That is, therefore, a very encouraging trend. But it is sad to note that the aircrew recruiting has been mainly unsatisfactory. I have no doubt at all that the impression created by the 1957 White Paper that manned aircraft were on the way out (and this is referred to in paragraph 47 of the Memorandum) has been largely responsible for this trend, which it will require strenuous and continuing efforts to correct. I hope that the Government spokesman may be able to tell us what progress is being made in this respect.

In 1957 it appeared that the manned military aircraft were soon to be replaced as the main power of the R.A.F. by missiles of all kinds. The pendulum has swung to the limit. The supersonic bomber was cancelled; the P1, now called the Lightning, was to be the last manned fighter; and Transport Command received but a passing mention. It was hardly surprising that the impression grew that military manned aircraft were obsolescent and that there was no future in the R.A.F. for the man who wanted to fly. Now, wiser counsels have prevailed. The relative advantages of ground-launched missiles and aircraft ale better understood; and the principle is becoming accepted that, while no country which seeks to play a major role in world affairs to-day can afford to be without these missiles, they must be developed as weapons complementary to manned bombers and fighters and not in substitution for them.

This, then, is the position of equilibrium which, as it seems to me, we have reached to-day. The Mark II V-bombers, with their stand-off bomb, are being developed side by side with our intermediate-range ballistic missile. Development of the T.S.R.2 has at long last started as a tactical support aircraft to succeed the Canberra; and the Lightning, equipped with improved air-to-air missiles, is being developed in parallel with ground-to-air missiles. All this adds up to an impressive armoury in the R.A.F. for the defence of this country and our interests abroad. It also means a formidable task for industry, which has to provide the aircraft and missiles.

I feel that we must at this stage ask two questions. Is the equipment being planned for the R.A.F. adequate for the next ten to fifteen years? Is it the best equipment? Secondly, have we the necessary resources to provide it? In my view, the answer to both those questions is "Yes", with certain reservations. I believe that the V-bomber force has been, and will continue for many years to he, a powerful element in the deterrent strategy, but it is much more than that. The R.A.F., and particularly Bomber Command, is playing a vital rôle in showing the Flag abroad. I am delighted to see that this is recognised in paragraph 14 of the Secretary of State's Memorandum. But the time will come, perhaps in seven to ten years, when the V-bombers are obsolete. From the speech of my noble friend Lord Selkirk in the Defence debate, it seems clear that the present policy is that the Blue Streak should be the eventual replacement, and presumably, therefore, it is intended to adhere to the decision not to develop a supersonic strategic bomber.

Now, my Lords, the arguments on the relative merits of ballistic missiles and supersonic bombers are well known to many of your Lordships, and it would take too long to repeat them here. Suffice it to say that no one will claim that the ballistic missile has any value in peace other than as a contribution to the deterrent. Certainly the Memorandum accompanying the Air Estimates of 1969 will not be able to claim that valuable and friendly visits have been paid by Blue Streaks to overseas countries; nor will it be possible to reinforce overseas theatres with ballistic missiles at short notice. No doubt, my Lords, we all hope that in ten years' time we shall have progressed towards resolving the issues which now divide the world, and that there will be less need to spend so much of our resources on defence. It would, however, be most unwise—indeed, it would be courting disaster—to count on that, and I am sure that we should not put ourselves in a position of having to rely solely on such an inflexible weapon as the ballistic missile when the V-bombers are obsolete.

Unfortunately, the development time for a large supersonic aircraft is long, and we have already lost ground by abandoning the supersonic bomber project in 1957, particularly as much of the basic research work and the development of all the associated equipment for it was stopped at the same time. There are powerful arguments, both technical and economic, for and against Britain's participating in the large supersonic aircraft field, but this is not the moment to discuss them in any detail. From the military point of view, the case in favour of the large supersonic aircraft rests mainly on the inflexibility of the long-range missile. On the civil side, it rests mainly on the need for this country to be able to supply her airlines with the high speed aircraft which inevitably will come in the future. From the general economic point of view, it remains of great importance for this country to keep in the fore front of aeronautical development. For such reasons as these, I am sure that we cannot afford to take the risk of abandoning development in this field, and I hope that the noble Earl who is to reply will make it clear that the Government are prepared to reconsider their decision, partly because of the military need, and partly because there is little prospect of success for a civil supersonic airliner without the backing of a military requirement.

Finally, my Lords, in answer to the second question, relating to the industry's ability to meet the demand upon it, I believe that with good organisation and determined efforts the industry is well able to meet its present and future commitments, and that there is room for the development of a large supersonic aircraft, taking into account both the magnitude of the task and its timing. Clearly, we can afford only one type of such aircraft, and the selection of the design point will require very careful consideration if the aircraft is to be a worthwhile step forward in the time scale chosen. But unless this development is undertaken—and preliminary work should start soon—the long-term future of the British aircraft industry and of the R.A.F. will not be assured.

My Lords, I have dealt at some length with two points—one of manpower, one of equipment—which seem to me of great significance to the Royal Air Force, and I hope that the Government will be able to give us some further information on each of them. The strength of the Royal Air Force to-day remains of vital importance to the defence of this country and of the free world. The motto of the Royal Naval Gunnery School, "Si vis pacem: pare bellum"—"If you want peace, prepare for war"—is as true today as it has always been. The officers and men of the Royal Air Force are successfully striving to do just that. It is our job to see that they have the resources needed to do it, and I believe that we should congratulate the Government on the progress they have made to that end.

4.25 p.m.

LORD MERRIVALE

My Lords, before addressing your Lordships on the Motion before the House to-day, I should like to express my apologies for not being in my place during the earlier stages of this debate, but I was sitting on a Committee upstairs. I should also like to express my apologies to the noble Earl who will be speaking later on in the debate for the Government, in so far as I may make certain remarks which he may well have covered in his previous speech. I shall be as brief as possible, but there are one or two questions I should like to ask Her Majesty's Government, and there are one or two points I wish to make. My remarks will concern solely Bomber Command, Fighter Command, and the Royal Air Force, Germany.

To consider Bomber Command first, I was particularly glad to read quite recently that the time taken to "scramble" four V-bombers had been reduced to three minutes, fifty-nine seconds, for in the Memorandum the standard time for a "scramble" of four bombers is given as six minutes. I think that is a very considerable reduction and I believe it is the intention of the Royal Air Force to reduce the time still further. That, I think, is a very important point indeed.

Further on the question of Bomber Command, I should like to refer to the question of air-to-air refuelling. Perhaps I may quote to your Lordships paragraph 14 of the Memorandum, which reads as follows: It is not only in the nuclear role that the V-bombers are so valuable. If need be, they can be used, together with other aircraft of Bomber Command, to deliver a very heavy weight of conventional bombs in any part of the world in which the United Kingdom may be engaged in the defence of her interests or in support of her allies and friends". Here, my Lords, I should like to stress the words: … V-bombers…if need be they can be used…to deliver a very heavy weight of conventional bombs in any part of the world… As I understand it, we have only one squadron—214 Squadron—which is equipped for air-to-air refuelling. This squadron is equipped with Vickers Valiant aircraft; and I was particularly interested to read quite recently that some impressive performance figures with regard to speed and range had been achieved with these aircraft when several of them flew from Norfolk to Southern Rhodesia and to Kenya. Respectively, the average speeds were 521.4 miles an hour and 567 miles an hour. The purpose of these flights is to perfect operating procedures for refuelling in the air, rendezvous techniques, and signals communications. This squadron seems to be doing some exceedingly good work, and I am wondering whether the experience which has been gained over the months by this squadron, and the technique of refuelling in the air which has been proved to be satisfactory, could be extended to other aircraft.

In a debate in another place early in March, the Secretary of State for Air referred to this question of air-to-air-refuelling, but with very few details indeed. From his remarks I feel that the general public do not know exactly when this country may expect the Victor and and Vulcan aircraft to be equipped for air-to-air refuelling, nor is it clear whether the Lightning, when it does come out and is supplied to squadrons, will be equipped for air-to-air refuelling. The actual words of the Secretary of State for Air in that debate were [OFFICIAL REPORT, Commons, Vol. 601 (No. 71), col. 631]: Future aircraft such as the Lightning, the A.W.660 and the T.S.R.2, will be able to reecive fuel in the air and thus be ferried over long stages. I wonder whether the noble Earl can state, when he replies, if that means that these aircraft will be fitted automatically with air-to-air refuelling facilities. I think that these facilities for V-bombers is a most important development from the point of view of increasing the range of these aircraft and thereby making it possible to enlarge the scope of their dispersal facilities. With regard to the Lightning—as the noble Earl has nodded acquiesence, I need not go any further on that point.

In view of the Government's aim at some later date, which is still unspecified, could the noble Earl mention what are the proposals for increasing the number of Valiant tanker aircraft? I should think that at the moment their numbers are quite insufficient, beyond the number which is required for 241 Squadron, for air-to-air refueling facilities.

While still on the question of Bomber Command, I should like to draw your Lordships' attention to the fact that at the moment, as I am advised, there are over fourteen companies in the United States competing for a contract for the weapons system No. 138a. This is an air-launched ballistic missile to be carried within the North American B-70 bomber, to which I have referred in previous debates. This missile is to be launched at a speed of Mac 3 and at an altitude of 70,000 feet. Its range, with a megaton warhead, is given as being of the order of 1,000 miles. Therefore, it would seem that this B-70 bomber will have a considerable speed and ceiling.

To finalise my remarks on Bomber Command, I come to paragraph 14 of the Defence White Paper. It says: An increasing proportion of the British strategic bomber force is being equipped with Vulcan and Victor aircraft. Their performance, in speed and altitude, remains unsurpassed by any bomber aircraft in service in any other country,—. For how long will that be the case? Has not the time come for Her Majesty's Government to announce either research on or possibly development of a bomber to supersede the Victor? Although this B-70 is not yet in production in America, from reports received it would appear that it will not be very many years more before it will go into squadron service.

I should like to turn to the question of missiles, whether concerning Bomber Command or Fighter Command. With regard to Thor, the deployment map at the back of the Memorandum shows this missile as being operational, but paragraph 16 of the Memorandum states that Thor squadrons are being deployed for training purposes. In view of the recent success of the R.A.F. team at the Vanderberg air base in America in the launching of a Thor missile, could the noble Earl tell us when it is proposed that this weapon can become operational from the deterrent point of view? It would be interesting to refer to some remarks made in an article in the Daily Telegraph of April 14. The article states: So far there have been 38 firings. In the eight this year, according to the Ballistic Missiles Centre, 'all would have satisfied an operational mission'. More than 40 have been committed for use as first stages in rocket assemblies for such projects as putting earth satellites into orbit. This is a tribute to the remarkable engine provided by the rocket division of North American Aviation. Surely it cannot be long now before the launching sites can be supplied with potentially operational Thor missiles.

With regard to air-to-air missiles, I was particularly glad to read in the Memorandum that there is to be a missile which is to be more effective than the Firestreak for the English Electric Lightning aircraft, with a view to countering any improved enemy jamming techniques. It is also gratifying to learn that Her Majesty's Government have decided to develop a more advanced type of Bloodhound missile, which would have more lethal power at increased ranges and altitude and also improved low altitude performance. The latter fact is particularly important, I think, when we remember that between our first-line defence and the U.S.S.R., the ground never rises over 300 feet above sea level—a very flat terrain, indeed.

At this point I should like to turn to the question of personnel and to congratulate Her Majesty's Government on the scheme which was recently announced by the Secretary of State for Air, the local service scheme for the Women's Royal Air Force. I believe that has met with a good response and within a few weeks from the announcement over 400 women applied. That is particularly encouraging, because women are admirably suited to the work of radar screen scanning, plotting work and so on, and I think they could usefully relieve men of the Royal Air Force in those duties in this country and in Germany.

Finally, I would refer to two points concerning the Royal Air Force, Germany. The first is to pay tribute to the operational efficiency of the Royal Air Force, Germany, and particularly with regard to the constant watch which is being maintained there over a twenty-four hour period with the aid of radar and by other means. The second point I should like to put in the form of a question to the noble Earl, and it concerns a statement in paragraph 29 of the Memorandum, which says that 100 flying instructors have been loaned for a period of three to five years to the German Air Force. The point I want to make is that when I was a member of a Parliamentary Delegation last October to a number of Royal Air Force bases and establishments we were definitely told that suitable applicants for aircrew were just not forthcoming. Six months have elapsed since then, and in view of the important part that the German Air Force can play within the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, I wonder whether the noble Earl could give any details as to this.

4.42 p.m.

LORD ST. OSWALD

My Lords, illustrious and enlightening though this debate 'has been, certain noble Lords whose views I had hoped to hear have, for one reason or another, been unable to ventilate those views this afternoon; and only last night I learned, to my regret, we were to be bereft of the always direct and authoritative views of my noble friend Lord De L'Isle. The discussion has none the less ranged widely, and weighty experience, as one expects from yourLordships' House, has been brought to bear. Even in concentrating upon three aspects of this subject alone, a mere soldier is liable to get into a great deal of trouble in this arena of experts, and I am not going to stick my head into any one lion's mouth for longer than I can help.

As a general point, I should like to say how logical and undeniable it seems to me, as a layman, that "research cannot be turned on and off like a tap." If Government funds are withheld or reduced for no more than a year or two, the flow may be broken irrecoverably: the flow of ideas and the flow of advancing skills to apply those ideas. The subsidies which the American aircraft industry enjoys are clearly unapproachable here, but I think that presents no cause to despair. Such despair would not only abandon one industry, the aircraft industry itself Lord Halsbury, as a Director of the National Research and Development Corporation, wrote three years ago: Increasingly, the aircraft industry first tackles, then solves, and finally dominates the solution of problems which no other branch of engineering would have an incentive to attempt. My right honourable friend the Minister of Supply made the same point in a speech at the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Bedford last year, and I sincerely hope that it will be kept not at the back but in the forefront of the mind of every responsible Minister.

The limits of our achievement are, happily, not on the same scale as the limits of our resources. But they must be in some sort of ratio, so that if a little can be made to go a long way, then reasonably a little more can be made to go a good deal further. This has been proved in more than one branch of development on which I should like to touch in a moment. But first I want to deal with an aspect which caused me some despondency two years ago, but about which I am more cheerful to-day—namely, Transport Command.

When the new defence concept was unveiled for us in a memorable White Paper, I looked at a map to see how it would work in an emergency—and I mean an emergency far from home. Because what was, and still is, envisaged was a right little, tight little Army, based in our right little, tight little Island—a Central Reserve ready to be flown off at a moment's notice to any trouble spot on the earth, to settle that trouble and to fly back again. But at the time, unless each soldier were to be issued with "Wings, individual; flapping, for the use of", I could not personally see how they were going to fly there; certainly not in aeroplanes, because the aeroplanes were not physically available. And their provision, as allowed for in the Air Estimates which accompanied the "new look" White Paper, did not hearten me very much. I found myself echoing the fears expressed by the noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, and the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, at the time. But that is not the picture to-day.

The graph at the back of the Memorandum shows 75 million passenger-miles per annum flown by Transport Command just before 1957, and foresees 150 million passenger-miles in 1960. In paragraphs 30 to 38 of the same Memorandum the actual record of lifting done in the Middle East and the Far East in the past year or so is far more than simply creditable, especially in the operations to Amman. There are figures of 1,500 men, 231 vehicles and trailers, and over 100 tons of fuel being flown over in twenty-four hours. That demonstrates a high degree of efficiency, and it also demonstrates the quality of the aircraft employed. That was all tactical lifting. Until the Britannic III strategic freighter comes into operation in substantial numbers we should, I think, be hard put to meet a distant commitment in a hurry. What the minimum necessity in this respect may be it is, I suppose, almost impossible to measure, because we cannot measure the scale of a hypothetical emergency. Personally, I should like to see still more urgency given to the strategic lift, but with the Britannic III the strategic lift will become a fact instead of a dream. And when that happens, the Hastings, which has always been overstrained and inadequate in its strategic role, will be able to revert to its proper function within a war theatre, where rapid local supply and reinforcement may be vital.

That brings me naturally on to the second phase of my speech, the matter of V.T.O.L's—vertical take-off and landing craft—a new and, to me, utterly fascinating field of development now in its precocious infancy. First, I should like to refer briefly to its most familiar form and its best-known application. The helicopter is no longer revolutionary, but new capabilities and new employments are evolving, some of them startling. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, that it should be of considerable pride to this country that the first vertical take-off airliner in the world is the British Fairey Rotodyne. Rather less gratifying is the fact that unless Canada and the United States had taken it up and placed life-giving orders, this magnificent machine would not be in production at all.

The present version carries 48 passengers at 200 miles per hour. The one coming up, with a more powerful engine, will carry 65 passengers at 250 miles per hour. I am not going to tangle myself in mechanical descriptions, so earning the no doubt politely veiled contempt of some technical noble Lords like the noble Lord, Lord Merrivale, sitting in front of me. I merely record that the Fairey Rotodyne ascends vertically in the same manner as the helicopter, and, having gained height, flies forward as a fixed-wing airliner. By doing so, it overcomes the speed limitations of the helicopter and dispenses with the long runways needed for fixed-wing aircraft or airliners. I am a mechanical dunce, but reading, as I have done in the past few days, the story of the Fairey Rotodyne, its tale of mechanical triumph stirs even my mechanically uneducated mind and imagination. I was unable to follow my noble friend Lord On slow in placing the jet helicopter in the distant future, because, as I understand it—though I am open to be corrected—the Fairey Rotodyne, which we have working already and in production, is, in fact, a turbo-jet helicopter.

There are, of course, other smaller helicopters, with their own tasks and purposes, and in war those tasks can be absolutely vital. The French Army has been making extensive use of helicopters in Algeria, and I can speak with a certain personal experience of their use in Korea. The difference made to the morale of the troops by the presence close behind them of a helicopter was quite in describable. In rough territory of that nature, what a soldier really feared was to be wounded, rather than killed; for to be wounded meant being evacuated along perhaps 20 miles of rough earth road, shaken to his bones, probably dying on the way, and wishing he were dead every mile of the way. The contrast of knowing that, were he wounded, he would be lifted within ten minutes comfortably on a stretcher hung under a helicopter, and within fifteen or ten minutes he would be down again in a dressing station, made a matter of critical difference to morale. Entirely apart from the evacuation of wounded, there is the supply and reinforcement role, which cannot be exaggerated.

At this point, I should like to join again, if I may, with the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, in his "fifth column" work on behalf of the Army, and record how very hampering the Army finds this local by-law insisting that no soldier can be trusted to pilot or to control an aircraft with a load of over 4,000 lb. This removes from Army Commanda number of air vehicles which could be of critical assistance, and undoubtedly impairs the efficiency and modernisation of the ground forces. I should like to put in my word in favour of a more imaginative and up-to-date interpretation of this rule.

The smaller helicopters have already been given their task on the battlefield, but I should have thought that in war, so often fought in country ill-provided with aerodromes, there was a critical place for the Fairey Rotodyne as well. There can hardly be a military commander who would not find them of immense advantage and who would put to the very best use even one or two Fairey Rotodynes for rapid reinforcement, for the movement of tactical staff and for overcoming other at present insoluble problems.

Now, my Lords, I should like to turn for a moment or two from the familiar and developing types to the frankly futuristic, but a future already buzzing in our ears. If any of my noble friends has not yet heard of ZGP's, Ducted Fans and the Cockerell Hovercraft, I have stolen a march on them—a five-day march to be precise. And with the "Airofoil Platform" I count on increasing my lead, at least for a moment. I hope that Britain will keep its production lead for longer than I keep my debating lead in this matter, and that your Lordships will encourage it to do so. For a moment I must count upon your Lordships being as fascinated as I was, and am—though mine will be a far clumsier description than that given to me a few days ago.

The Zero Ground Pressure or air-cushioned vehicle will have made its first journey in a matter of weeks. This is its theory. By a comparatively small output of power, a manned platform can raise itself off the ground to a limited height and maintain itself at that limited height above ground. It can then, by propelling itself laterally, move itself over the ground without wings or wheels on its own air cushion. The existing experimental model, which I am told will make its first trip in June, is small. It measures 6 ft. by 4 ft., carries two men, and will move along 3 ft. above the ground. It is being made by Saunders-Roe, and is likely to be on show at Farnborough this year.

The next one planned will measure 40 ft. by 20 ft. and will carry 600 tons at a height of 6 ft. But the limits are barely in sight. The third model could well be a freighter carrying 3,000 to 6,000 tons at 100 miles per hour; and one possible application, a car ferry across the Channel, immediately suggests itself. If that is straying too far from the martial theme of this debate, I would ask your Lordships to imagine the importance of such a carrier on an atomic battlefield—a tactical atomic battlefield, where we recognise that dispersal will be inevitable, and yet it will still be essential to reform units across land where roads, railways and bridges have been utterly destroyed.

Other uses are foreseen by American military thinkers. Earlier this year, in January, Rear-Admiral Rawson Bennet, Chief of American Naval Research, told the Congress Committee on Science and Astronautics: that the Navy also can foresee a number of possible uses for such vehicles, including an amphibious transport or an assault boat that would travel 4 or 5 ft. above the waves at speeds of 50 miles per hour, and be capable of negotiating beaches with slopes of up to 15 per cent. Another possible use, Admiral Bennet said, would be in antisubmarine warfare. He said studies are being conducted which may lead to a radio-controlled platform that can ride high enough to clear the waves and travel 20 per cent. faster than nuclear-powered submarines. The vehicle, he said, must be capable of floating in the water for extended periods, and be equipped automatic lifting and tracking facilities so that it could seek out an enemy submarine, hover over the top and drop a bomb, and then move off to await another command to attack. Still another possible use, Admiral Bennet said, would be an ocean-going transport, a circular ship platform, 1.000 ft. in diameter, that would be capable of speeds up to 150 knots and operate 50 ft. above the waves. The Americans are interested. Britain at the moment leads in technique. There is one more discovery upon which I am permitted to touch only in very guarded terms. There is to-day a man-made flying saucer, a machine which can take off vertically and then, almost with the motion of a bird's wing, project itself forward at immense speed. It was invented by an Englishman and is now being constructed in the United States.

My Lords, I have finished my attempt, poor attempt though undoubtedly it was, at description. If I have enticed the imaginations of any noble Lords, I have here with me pictures demonstrating some of these machines. The vehicles I have named, and others, are not dreams in the brain of a mad professor: they are mechanical facts in our own day. When, in the natural process of time, these rather progressive matters come up for discussion in another place, I hope they will receive the same courteous, if partly incredulous, hearing which your Lordships 'have accorded.

Your Lordships are not going to escape, I fear, without some sort of moral being drawn. Nobody, I hope, appreciates more than I do the importance to this country of exports. But do not, I beg, let us export all our most adventurous brains. That seems to me an invisible, non-returnable and entirely lamentable form of export. There are measures and regulations to prevent or delay works of art from leaving this country, but intellects are free to do so at any time. They cannot be ordered to stay; they may be persuaded. All that most of them ask is for the environment and the encourage- ment necessary to serve their country and to serve science. That provision is the Government's task.

Now it seems clear that to end I can go only in one possible direction from here, to follow my noble friend Lord Jellicoe a little way into outer space. In the twenty years of an exuberant friendship, our views, of which we hold many, have always been either irreconcilably in conflict or impregnably in concord. Today I am happy to find that I am in the strongest agreement both with what he said and with the way he said it. Yesterday my noble friend Lord Conesford and I discovered him in the Library working diligently through a pile of brightly coloured space-fiction literature, and I was relieved to discover that he was not depending entirely on that source for his speech to-day. In another place to-night Mr. de Freitas is raising this particular subject, but even if the noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate, were in his place there would be no danger of my goading him into remonstrance by repeating Mr. de Freitas's words, because they have not yet been spoken. If I did so, however, I should like to say that it would be in order to express my support.

I hope that such investment as the Government may allow for this purpose will not be the minimum necessary to save face or to meet criticism. I hope that it will be the maximum the economy of the country can stand. With the noble Earl, Lord Jellicoe, it seems to me that there is no economic question or scientific purpose in trying to "go it alone" into outer space; nor should there be any danger of duplication. Here is a clear, wide open, promising field for reciprocity and interdependence. The achievements of our scientists in instrumentation can make the American vehicles worth despatching into space. The fact that we can only send our own instruments in their vehicles bears no hint of charity or of mendicancy that I can see. It would be a shared effort in a shared achievement. But to claim a share we must also provide our own share, and that cannot be done without Government backing and Government expenditure. I believe that as a people we look far enough ahead to see the need for that. I believe that such expenditure would be approved today: I am certain that it would be applauded to-morrow.

5.5 p.m.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, tempted as I am to follow the noble Lord, Lord St. Oswald, into this fascinating realm, I feel I must initially deal with the question 'of the present-day Royal Air Force. I would. however, make initially one correction of 'the noble Earl, Lord Jellicoe. He referred to Don Dare; it is in fact Dan Dare. This is obviously an important aspect of the education of the noble Lord in the question of space travel. I would, however, to return temporarily only to this earth, like to express my thanks and the thanks of my noble friends to the noble Earl, Lord On slow, for making a speech early in the debate and then being willing again to return and in fact give us two bites at the cherry. It is a help to have had some of his elucidation of the Memorandum which we are discussing.

I think my noble friend, Lord Ogmore, in a characteristically informed and helpful speech, has introduced a debate which has been extremely well informed, even when the incursion of soldiers brought us into a more rarified atmosphere. I am only regretful that some of the former Secretaries of State and Ministers from the Air Ministry were prevented by ill health from taking part to-day, but we had all the weight and authority of the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, once again on this subject. It reminds me of the importance of those with a long connection with their Service, both as Ministers and, indeed, as serving officers. When I first entered Parliament in another place I was sent for by the late Lord Trenchard, who reminded me that it was my duty, as I was then still a serving officer in the Air Force, to support my Party in all proper matters but to support the Air Force whenever the question of the Air Force came up. I am happy to say that on the whole I have not found any serious conflict between those two duties. It is, I think, a measure of the good will that the Air Ministry enjoys that these debates are conducted in both places in such a non-Party atmosphere.

One of the advantages that we have had, particularly after the war, has been the knowledge that many of us acquired in the Services, but that is to-day rather a wasting asset. I last did some Reserve service five years ago, and I am now over the age limit; some mysterious "43" or "45" came in, which meant that I could no longer go back. It is for that reason, as well as many other reasons, that I welcome the advent in this House of my noble friend Lord Morris of Kenwood. The noble Lord's contribution as a maiden speech was, I thought, entirely admirable, and the knowledge that he has brought, as an ex-fighter pilot who not so very long ago was serving in an Air Force Squadron, I think makes very clear the value of this expert knowledge which comes from direct contact and direct experience.

I should like to take up straight away some of the matters to which he referred. Now that the "golden bowler" programme is beginning to come to an end, we find ourselves in a position when this fundamental problem of careers for officers who do not reach the higher ranks, and particularly Air rank, is increasingly an obstacle to recruitment. Whether this is good or bad, people tend to-day to look forward to what may happen to them in later life, and the generosity of the present "golden bowler" scheme is no real substitute for a solution to the problem which my noble friend Lord Morris of Kenwood explained so clearly.

I am particularly shocked at his revelation of the disability that attaches to graduates. It seems to me of the greatest importance that graduates should, in some numbers at any rate, be attracted into the Services. Some of the great commanders, such as Lord Tedder, have in fact been graduates. Of course, we do not want the Air Force entirely composed of graduates; we want a few; and I think that this disability, if it exists in precisely the form that my noble friend mentioned, ought in some way to be removed. I see no reason why a notional period of service should not be created, equivalent perhaps to the seniority which I believe is granted to those who have emerged from the university with a reasonable Honours degree. I hope that the Government will give real attention to, and will bring flexibility to bear upon, these particular regulations.

I should like now to congratulate the Government on the success of the general recruiting programme. It is satisfactory to look at Appendix E and to see the really striking increase in the numbers of those who have entered into longer engagements. Other noble Lords have dealt with certain of the black spots in recruiting, and particularly with the question of aircrew and certain tradesmen. I do not propose to follow that out to-day, because I think the Government must be as well aware as anyone of those deficiencies; but I should like to turn to the extent to which they could make Service life a little more palatable. I am not suggesting that it is not a very good life, but there are still restrictions which are trying and which, from time to time, are felt to be unnecessary.

I must therefore refer once again to the Benson experiments. We really have not had a clear explanation from the Government of what is going on in that regard. We have been told that certain experiments have taken place. I confess that I do not quite know what they are, but I gather that they are of a kind which are liable to give Service life some of the extra freedoms that are to he found in civilian life, together with certain privileges. A statement made in another place indicates that it has been left more to the discretion of station commanders as to how far they introduce some of these experiments. I am all for giving station commanders the maximum freedom and initiative to try out these things, and I do not cloubt that some of the more adventurous ones will; but where an experiment of this kind has been a proved success, then it may be necessary to encourage some of the more conservative-minded ones by directives from the Air Ministry. I would ask the Government to 'ear this in mind, because undoubtedly they will be pressed, both here and in another place, on the progress of these experiments. We shall certainly not leave it to be dropped into the limbo.

Another aspect of what might be called the normalisation or civilianisation of Service life is in the feeding arrangements that are made at home stations. The suggestion has been made—I am not quite sure whether it could be worked —that instead of the meals always being provided free, on an automatic Take it or leave it "basis, it should be possible for airmen and airwomen occasionally to pay for their meals and to be given suitable allowances so that they can make their own choice. After all, this is a development in industry to-day where industrial canteens do provide a considerable measure of choice and where it is possible for those who want to pay a little more, they being rather "flush", to buy something better, whilst others will have to be more economic. It may be that this is administratively impossible, and it may be that it is not the particular suggestion that should be adopted, but it is in thinking in this sort of way that I think the Government will be able to go on developing the Air Force in these matters in the direction in which we should like them to go.

I was a little sorry that we have heard so little about the Women's Royal Air Force. I think it was the noble Lord, Lord Merrivale, who referred to the development of the new scheme for an immobile section of the Women's Royal Air Force. We are told that it is going well. Could the Minister tell us what is happening; how many women have been recruited, and what has been the effect on the normal Regular recruiting, and, indeed, on the moral of the other airwomen who are fully amenable to Air Force discipline? This is a rather dangerous experiment. I think the Government are right to make it. But we should like to know how it is going, and what is the effect of that scheme.

I should also like to know how far the Air Ministry will be more sympathetic in future to applications for compassionate postings made by women officers and airwomen who do accept mobility. At present an airwoman who refuses to accept an overseas posting forfeits her right to promotion. This is rather hard where circumstances are such that those concerned have no choice at all. This question of compassionate posting and mobility is one of the most difficult things there is—there is no single solution; but I should be interested to know from the noble Earl whether he is able to give us any information on developments in this field.

On this question of postings and that magic word turbulence", I would criticise the Air Ministry for some of the things they have done. They really seemed to be moving certain units about just for the fun of it. I am sure that they did not in fact do it for fun, and I am sure they also did it with full consideration of the serious hardship they would inflict upon people. I have in mind particularly the Air Ministry unit which I believe was moved from West Drayton or Ruislip down to Kenley. I understand that this is a unit which is manned by people who are permanent, and suddenly to shift them from one side of London to the other is a very serious hardship indeed. If we could be given some explanation why that was necessary, it would be helpful.

I appreciate that the Air Ministry are doing their best to make the best use they can of available facilities—they are trying to use buildings that they have put up, together with married quarters, and so on. This, again, draws attention to the importance of some forward-looking on the subject of where they are going to put up all their permanent married quarters. I was very sad, partly for sentimental reasons because it is my old station, when R.A.F. Station St. Eval was closed down this year. I am told that there are practical reasons and that St. Mawgan is a better aerodrome. But St. Eval has excellent married quarters and buildings, and it is literally in the middle of no where. It may be that they will continue to be used and that the squadron at St. Mawgan will live at St. Eval. These are difficulties which I hope will be kept under close review at the highest level in the Air Ministry, and will not be dealt with as consequential decisions on other questions.

While I am on the subject of administration, there is one proposal that I would make. We have seen in the Memorandum some encouraging references to organisation and methods. I would urge that there should be some small discretionary funds available at command level, or even lower, for carrying out experiments of the kind that are liable to make really important savings. It is the experience of anyone in industry, or indeed in Government service, that it is highly desirable under any system of budgetary control to make certain discretionary funds available. I am afraid that the tendency in the Air Force is always to button it up very tightly; and those commanders who have been convinced that there are important savings which can be made are deprived of the opportunity of putting them into effect because they lack the funds to carry out the necessary experiments. This is a serious suggestion which I hope the noble Earl will convey to his right honourable friend.

I should like to touch briefly on the subject of reserves. The Air Ministry seem to have forgotten all about reserves. So far as I can see thereis virtually no mention of them in the Memorandum. Yet I should have thought that this was a time, especially when the vast numbers of "G" and "H" reservists are beginning to disappear, when the Ministry should be developing this and not forgetting it. After all, this Memorandum and the speeches of Ministers are all part of the projection of the needs and ideas of the Royal Air Force. I believe there is scope for further development. Is it possible that there ought to be some clearer responsibility for reserves in the Air Ministry? I am not clear where, under the existing structure, reservists come—whether under Home Command or Training Command. I am afraid I am not up to date on that point; but I know of particular units where there is a feeling that they have been a little forgotten and there are further developments that might be made. A few years ago air defence units were set up to man operations rooms in certain commands, though not all. At present, Coastal Command still depend wholly on volunteers coming back year after year. There is no reason why local air defence units could not be made up to meet that particular need.

I turn from the administrative and manpower side to equipment. First, I would welcome the proposal to turn Signals Group into a Command. Now that that has happened, I can only say I am surprised that it did not happen earlier, though I admit that it did not occur to me. It is clear that the responsibilities and enormous expenditure in the field of radar and signals fully justify this particular Command, with its responsibility for counter-measures and early warning; and there is every justification for giving it Command status.

On the subject of aircraft, a number of noble Lords have referred with some relief to the fact that the 1957 policy seems to have been changed. I would only say that I hope Her Majesty's Government are right in foreseeing a reasonably long future for the types of aircraft they are now introducing. How long that will be so I do not know, and obviously controversy will continue on the question of whether the TSR.2 should have been introduced instead of the NA.39. Personally, from the account they have given, I believe that Her Majesty's Government are right in the decisions that they have taken, but clearly it is not possible for us here, or those in another place, to have the highly secret technical information on which these decisions are based. The important point is that, quite apart from direct, war-making aircraft, there will always be an important role for aircraft and aircrews in a more flexible form, whether in transport or in the many other activities in which aircraft will be used. I shall have a little to say on that later.

I must touch briefly on the question of missiles. It is very difficult to keep in mind what all these different misiles are. They have the most fascinating names: Firestreak, Bloodhound, Black Knight, Blue Streak and the rather unattractively named naval weapon, Sea Slug. I am glad that the Royal Air Force have nor got that one. But we are still left in some doubt as to what the role affords, and it seems to me that Her Majesty's Government, both here and in another place, have made quite unnecessary trouble for themselves by emphasising the fact that the existing Thor missiles are here only for training purposes. They keep emphasising the training rôle as though they were slightly ashamed of the Thor. At any rate, that has been the effect; and the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, has to-day emphasised that those we have here are for training purposes.

THE EARL OF ONSEOW

My Lords, I am sorry to interrupt the noble Lord, but I want to point out to him that at the moment we have reached only the training stage. Those weapons will be coming into operation as quickly as possible although they are not operational yet. We are not ashamed of them.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, this is true of every weapon and every aircraft. I will not refer in detail to the debate in another place, but Her Majesty's Government seem to have quite unnecessarily got at cross-purposes with the rest of the world through not making the position clear. I understand that the noble Earl is saying that the Thor is to-day in its training and development stage and will be operational, and we understand that Her Majesty's Government have absolute confidence that this is the right guided missile—or have they still a slight feeling that in the end it will not prove to be much good? At any rate, when the noble Earl comes to reply, it would be helpful to have a forthright reply, and one which, I hope, will be a little clearer than was given by his right honourable friend the Secretary of State in another place. I admit that the right honourable gentleman was being rather harassed at the time, and perhaps it is a little unfair to pursue him on this subject; but I hope we shall get a clear statement on this matter.

I would turn to the subject of Blue Streak and its peaceful application. The noble Lords, Lord Jellicoe and Lord St. Oswald, have talked at great length on the possibility of a space-research programme, and I shall therefore confine remarks I had intended to make on this subject to saying that I hope Her Majesty's Government will face up to that question. There is a feeling that this is somehow a subject that should be left to America and Russia and that so far as we are concerned it is still science fiction. This is not really so. We know that Her Majesty's Government are going to be advised on this matter, but I hope that they will not continue the equivocal attitude of many Members of Parliament in this House and another place, and the general public, that somehow it is too unlikely for serious men to bother with. It is something that is here now, something which is going to happen—and other nations are going to do it.

In the past, development and exploration and all these exciting moves which have been so characteristic of our country have frequently been carried through by private individuals, sometimes in pursuit of gain. This is quite outside the capacity of private individuals and I hope there will be no gain, in that sense, involved. So it is to Her Majesty's Government that we have to look, when we have as one of the by-products of this horrid business of preparing for war, suitable rockets which for comparatively small expenditures (as was made clear by the noble Lords, Lord Jellicoe and Lord St. Oswald) could be developed for space research.

Again I echo most heartily the view that that should be done on a Commonwealth basis and on a European basis, similar perhaps to Euratom. I will even suggest that this is something with which N.A.T.O. might concern itself. We hear a great deal about the political difficulties at N.A.T.O. and elsewhere, but there is no doubt that co-operation at Service level at N.A.T.O. is still extraordinarily good; and one of the strengths of N.A.T.O. has been the extent to which real friendship and international co-operation have been achieved. It is a curious thing that soldiers, airmen and scientists seem able to get on with each other much better, perhaps, than politicians can. It may be that their lives are simpler. But here is something that I should like to suggest should be laid on the plate of N.A.T.O. We are always being told—and those of us who have been in the Services on exercise know that one always gets beforehand a little "pep" talk pointing it out—that N.A.T.O. has a peaceful role. Here is one thing I should like to suggest they might undertake, because this question of space travel is a reality to-day, and it is just no good saying that we have enough troubles on earth. There is always an unlimited capacity—

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, it is a very interesting point that my noble friend is making; but last November at the N.A.T.O. Parliamentary Conference in Paris we did pass a resolution urging the N.A.T.O. Powers to undertake this very space research. I do not think they have done anything about it, but at least the N.A.T.O. Parliamentarians went on record as saying that they hoped the Governments would do so.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that helpful intervention, and I hope that what the Parliamentarians are now suggesting the Governments will do something about. At any rate, the initiative is with them, and this is part of the incentive for the future progress of this country. It is not just a question that only the Chancellor of the Exchequer's incentive Budget (if it was one) will decide whether we shall keep these scientists here; it is the opportunity to do constructive and exciting work; and it is one field in which I hope the Government will help them along.

I should like, in conclusion, to make one or two brief remarks with regard to the whole question of air power. I should like to refer to my old Command, Coastal Command, because it illustrates in quite striking degree the significance of the unity of air power. For to-day Coastal Command is not merely engaged in preparing for air-sea warfare; it is also engaged in colonial policing, and equally it has been engaged in transport. Indeed, a great deal of the effort to which one noble Lord referred in the transport field has been done not by Transport Command but by Coastal Command. It is of profound importance that we should preserve this unity of air power. That is why I was so delighted to hear the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, with all his authority, once again asking the Government to stop all this rumour that is still going on about the future of Coastal Command. It is frequently bandied about; it is a personal ploy of the Minister of Defence himself. Some of my naval friends say that they do not want Coastal Command—that it is being "shoved" at them—and there are others who do want it. This is fundamentally bad for morale. The suggestion which the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, made, that we should have an Admiral in command of Coastal Command is entirely consistent with the idea that there should be much closer interrelation between the Services. But we already have Admirals in command of the Coastal Command. We have Joint Headquarters and there is operational control, and it would be a tragedy to disturb that to-day.

Before I end, my Lords, I would say that I think we are getting, so far as manpower is concerned—and, indeed, so far as the aircraft are concerned—increasing value. There is an increase in efficiency in the Air Force, and I believe that that efficiency will continue to increase. I should like to congratulate the Secretary of State, who has had a number of hard things said to him. The last occasion on which we debated Air Force matters was when we were debating the Malcolm Clubs, and I am happy to think that to-day we can be kinder about the Secretary of State and the Government.

Morale is high in the Royal Air Force to-day, despite the gloomy remarks that the change in policy in the past over manned aircraft has produced. The Royal Air Force is playing a really important role; indeed a much more important role than some people will admit. There are the flights that take place. I believe that even this week a Shackleton aircraft will, almost as a matter of course, be flying round the world. Aircraft are beautiful things; they are not merely warlike instruments. They are objects which, I think, provide a shop window for this country. The Royal Air Force is admirably helping to display in a proper way our developments and our British ingenuity. But we must remember that the Air Force is getting smaller, and we must not expect it to do more than it is able to do. I have been told that in one Command last year some aircrew hardly had a week-end off duty. I do not know whether that is true, but if it is true then it is a warning that we must not expect them to undertake and to achieve the impossible. As to the development of bad-weather flying, I do not know whether it has reached a stage at which there is a great increase in bad-weather flying, but if there is a great increase, those natural breaks which climate imposed, and which so often provided the opportunity for relief from nervous strain, may tend to grow less in the future.

I conclude by saying that I think, on the whole, the Air Ministry and the Government are doing better in this field than perhaps they have done over the last few years. I am quite sure we can all express our full confidence in the Royal Air Force, and in the men who operate the aircraft and deal with all the other new and complicated developments. I hope that they will continue, with the message of good will that I am sure all your Lordships would send to them.

5.36 p.m.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, with the permission of your Lordships, I will rise again to try to answer some of the questions that have come from noble Lords who followed me after my first speech in this debate. I should like to join with other noble Lords in my sincerest congratulations to the noble Lord, Lord Morris of Kenwood, upon an exceedingly well-informed and interesting maiden speech; and I hope, quite genuinely, that we shall hear him often contributing to our debates. Indeed, I think we shall have that pleasure again this week.

So far as I am concerned, this has been an extremely constructive debate. I do net think anybody has tried to drag in any particular little Party point or anything like that; everybody has been, as I feel we should be in a debate like this, concerned to offer genuine, sensible and informed suggestions for the well being of the Royal Air Force, which I am sure all noble Lords from all parts of this House have deeply in their hearts. And I am sure that we are more than grateful to the Royal Air Force for what it has done, and is doing, and for what, I am sure, it will do in the future.

The noble Lord, Lord Morris of Ken-wood, and others, including the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, raised the question of recruiting. I quite agree with what the noble Lord said. As I said in my earlier remarks, it did get about that people thought that the manned aircraft was going to become a sort, of bow-and-arrow of this century, and I think that that definitely had some effect on recruiting. But I am glad to say that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State and his advisers (and I think noble Lords will agree, from the figures given in the Memorandum) feel that it is being killed—if, indeed, it is not quite killed already: and one can see that the figures for aircrew recruitment are improving considerably and have improved.

The noble Lord, Lord Morris of Kenwood, raised a question about civil airlines. I entirely agree with what he said. I understand that the position is getting more difficult now. I made some inquiries about the matter, and I understand that one reason is that, as there are bigger air liners, they carry more people and fewer pilots are wanted. As regards their recruitment (I stand subject to correction), they are not recruiting very much now. I imagine that the noble Lord will know more about this than I do. I believe that, certainly before the last war, and just after, the chance of recruitment into civil airlines was a great inducement for people to join the Royal Air Force and get their training. However, the Government are following up energetically the recommendations of the Grigg Committee, and will do all they can to ensure a steady flow of the numbers we want.

The noble Lord also spoke about exit ages. I think the Grigg Report also recommends that ways should be found to keep people up to the age of 60, because nowadays the doctors make us live longer and, as we come out of the Services or jobs, we are better and healthier and younger, and want to go on working. I suppose that that is a bit of a difficulty. A fellow says: "I shall be out at 40 or 45. What am I going to do for the next twenty-five years that the doctors have given me? I do not want to sit down, or to mow the lawn". However, I think that is a common problem in a good many jobs, and one which we all need to look at very carefully.

The noble Earl, Lord Jellicoe, the noble Lord, Lord St. Oswald, and the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, all gave us some very interesting (and some of it almost hair-raising) information on space. I am afraid that I cannot be very helpful to those noble Lords at the moment. As a matter of fact, it is out of the orbit of the Department for which I am now speaking. I am afraid that once again I have to tell the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, that it is in the orbit of the Minister of Supply, and is under urgent consideration, although I understand that there will be some sort of statement in the fairly near future.

Then the noble Lord, Lord Merrivale—he was not here at the beginning when I was speaking, but I know he had other duties—queried, as did the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, when he was opening the debate, the question of flight refuelling. For his convenience, I would reiterate what I said earlier on, that more of these Valliants are being fitted as tankers as they are replaced in the bomber squadrons by Victors and Vulcans; and the Lightning, the T.S.R.2, and theA.W.660, will all be fitted for flight refuelling. He also asked me, as did other noble Lords, about a successor for the V-bomber. My Lords, as seen at the moment, I cannot really say much more to your Lordships than I have said already and my right honourable friend has said in another place. It is considered that the V-bomber, particularly in its Mark 2 version, which is to come into service shortly, has many years ahead of it: but, meanwhile, it will be gradually supplemented by Blue Streak.

The noble Lord, Lord Merrivale, and the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, asked me about the Thor—perhaps on this point I did not make myself plain. The noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, in a very kindly way, more or less accused me and my colleagues of being ashamed. That is not the situation at all. I was trying to explain to the noble Lord that we have reached only the stage of our sites here being training sites; and that as the training of the crews in America is completed, and the modifications which the trials show to be necessary are made, then, as soon as possible, the Thor will become part and parcel of the deterrent. I hope that I have satisfied the noble Lord that it is not a question of saying we are not quite certain, and that we do not want to admit that. The trials are going very well, and when they have been completed it will be a question of fitting in the necessary modifications. At the same time, the sites are being built, the men are being trained, and experience is being gained: and the sooner they become an operational part of our defences the better we shall be pleased.

The noble Lord, Lord Merrivale, asked me about the arrangements for training with the German Air Force. I have made inquiries for him, and I understand that in August last year my right honourable friend and the Federal German Minister of Defence concluded an agreement for the loan of 100 R.A.F. flying instructors, for a period of three to five years, to help the German Air Force in flying training; and the German Government are meeting the cost of that agreement. I understand, also, that the first R.A.F. instructors arrived in Germany last August, and that the mission was brought to full strength about three months ago. The training is being given in basic flying, and is being carried out at German schools. It is now going in full flow, and progress is satisfactory to all. The whole programme, I understand, involves a good deal of effort both by ourselves and by the Germans, but is a great asset to N.A.T.O. as a whole. I also understand that flying training is being given in the United Kingdom by the R.A.F. to German naval pilots; and we are also giving ground and radar training.

LORD MERRIVALE

May I be permitted to interrupt the noble Earl, most respectfully? Do I understand that applicants are coming forward and are being trained by these R.A.F. instructors? They are coming forward satisfactorily. or to the satisfaction of the German Federal Government?

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

So I understand, yes.

Several noble Lords mentioned the question of air transport, and I would say that that is being increased. I think that very soon our transport capacity will be well over four times what it was in 1950. Then, the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, and others, asked about recruiting into the Women's Services. I understand that, though the figures were some what disappointing a little time back, since this local scheme has been introduced they are showing encouraging signs. There are ladies who find that, for various reasons, though they would like to serve the R.A.F., they cannot go anywhere or everywhere, but who, if they can serve from home, are prepared to do so. I gather that the signs here are encouraging.

My Lords, I have, I think, more or less answered the main questions that various noble Lords have asked. If I have left any out, I shall be only too glad to give the noble Lord concerned the answer afterwards. In the two speeches that I have made I have done my best to satisfy your Lordships' House, and I hope I have done it within reasonable limits.

5.49 p.m.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, the debate has not gone on quite so long as I had anticipated: noble Lords' speeches have been shorter than perhaps I thought they were going to be. Therefore it has not been necessary for me to leave, and I am a very pleased still to be here to thank the various noble Lords who have spoken in this debate, which we hold annually as one of the Service debates. I would particularly thank the noble Earl, who has had a trying task. It is always rather trying to have to reply to detailed questions. We can all talk about global things more easily than we can deal with matters of fact, particularly when, as in the case of the noble Earl, one is not a Minister in the Department concerned.

I should like to add my tribute to the many already paid to my noble friend Lord Morris of Kenwood and to say how much we enjoyed his contribution. The manner and matter were both excellent. As the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, has implied, it will not be long before your Lordships have the pleasure of hearing my noble friend once more, on what will be perhaps a unique occasion. It seldom occurs that a son-in-law introduces into your Lordships' House a Bill moved by his father-in-law in another place. That fact will add a little piquancy to the speech of my noble friend, especially if he disagrees on any point with his father-in-law.

I do not wish to detain your Lordships. I feel that we have had an interesting debate. It has been interesting to me. at all events, and I hope that the general public, the Air Ministry and all others concerned in the very important matter of the Royal Air Force will feel that it has been a constructive debate. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.