Sorry for the break in reporting these
Written Statements
Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
I wish to inform the House that one element of the current Framework Agreement for Technical Support (FATS) contract signed in April 2012 will need to be re-competed.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) uses FATS to procure specialist technical support to its defence equipment programmes and it is also used on a limited basis by other Government Departments. Suppliers compete to become members of the framework; users then place specific tasks through the framework, as and when they arise, preferably by running further competitions between member suppliers. The first iteration of FATS was instituted in 2006.
The fourth iteration of the framework, FATS4, was competed and companies selected to be members, with the framework commencing on 26 April 2012. The framework is broken into two lots. Lot one covers general support relating to materials, electrical/mechanical, power plants, IT, health, medical and transport requirements. Lot two relates to safety and duty of care areas such as airworthiness management, safety management, maritime safety, and technical support to platforms and weapons.
Technical deficiencies have been discovered in the way that lot two of FATS4 was awarded. Errors have been found in the way the assessment of suppliers’ technical capability, for lot two, was conducted and recorded. Some suppliers are therefore on the framework who should not have qualified and others, who should have qualified, were wrongly excluded from the process.
As a result, I have directed that MOD and other Government Departments must stop using lot two with immediate effect. The current situation is not fair and equitable to suppliers who bid to be included on this framework and, given that the areas affected relate to duty of care and safety, no risk can be taken over supplier capability. Contracts already placed under lot two will remain in place as none has been placed with a supplier in respect of whom any irregularity has occurred. Lot one is unaffected and will continue in use.
Despite this setback, FATS continues to represent a useful and efficient route for procuring specialist technical services and a replacement framework to cover these requirements will be put in place, which we estimate will take around six months. During this time, the MOD and other customers will place their own contracts individually for their specific needs following normal procurement process. This process will be managed so that it does not cause any delay in delivering equipment to our armed forces. The renewed competition and interim arrangements mean that the effect on any one supplier’s business is likely to be negligible.
The MOD has written to all affected suppliers to apologise for this failure of process and to inform them of the action being taken. I have asked the Director Commercial of the Department for Work and Pensions to conduct an external investigation to identify how and why this happened and to make recommendations as to how to prevent similar issues in the future. If evidence is brought to light that proper processes have not been followed, then disciplinary action will be taken as appropriate.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
I can today announce our plans to preserve the legacy of the Royal Navy’s Invincible class aircraft carriers.
The three Invincible class aircraft carriers—HMS Invincible (in service July 1980), HMS Ark Royal (in service November 1985) and HMS Illustrious (in service June 1982)—served this country with great distinction having played key roles in conflicts in the Falkland Islands, Iraq and Bosnia. The last of these, HMS Illustrious, is due to retire from the Royal Navy in 2014. After that date and in recognition of the service given by these ships in protecting the UK over the last 30 years, it is our preference to see HMS Illustrious preserved intact as a lasting tribute to the service personnel who served on all three of the carriers.
In early 2014 we intend to hold an industry day to launch a competition for the innovative reuse of the ship to which interested parties will be encouraged to attend. We will invite a range of organisations, including private sector companies, charities and trusts to put forward viable proposals to ensure that HMS Illustrious remains intact and available for future private use while still offering taxpayers value for money.
HMS Ark Royal was withdrawn from service last year, following the 2010 strategic defence and security review. Retiring the ship five years earlier than planned was a difficult decision but it was the right one that, combined with her sale, has saved over £100 million. That has helped the Ministry of Defence to achieve a sustainable and balanced budget for the first time in decades.
Following a competition, we have awarded a contract to sell HMS Ark Royal to the ship recycling company Leyal for around £3 million. The recycling will be carried out at the company’s site in Turkey, the same location at which HMS Invincible was recycled.
Although a number of proposals to find an alternative use for the ship were tendered, it was decided, after extensive evaluation, that the recycling of HMS Ark Royal was the most viable option and offered the best value for money for the taxpayer. Bids received for further use were either not feasible or appropriate, or carried too much risk.
HMS Illustrious is more suitable for preservation for further non-military use and, as such, is expected to attract interest from organisations who would be able to put forward mature and viable proposals, in keeping with the role and history of the Invincible class of ships.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
On 16 February 2012 an order was made under section 56(1A) of the Reserve Forces Act 1996 to enable 2,100 reservists to be brought into permanent service as part of defence’s contribution to the safety and security of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games.
On 7 August 2012 authority was granted to raise the number of reservists to 2,300.
In total 2,258 reservists were brought into permanent service.
Some provided specialist capabilities and expertise to defence’s support to the police and other civil and Olympic authorities, while the majority formed part of the support to Olympic venue security operations; a substantive contribution to what has widely been acknowledged as a successful and positive opportunity to interact with the British public and advertise the nation’s strengths to overseas observers.
The order ceases to have effect on 20 September 2012.
Written Answers
Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 5 July 2012, Official Report, column 415W, on veterans: radiation exposure, what data was provided to the authors of the National Radiological Protection Board reports.
Anne Milton (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Public Health), Health; Guildford, Conservative)
I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Department of Health
Data provided for the work reported in the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) reports have been collated in an epidemiological database. Data were collated from multiple sources by the researchers. Key data included:
radiation exposure data (from Ministry of Defence (MOD)/Atomic Weapons Establishment records);
identity, employment and demographic data (mostly MOD records, information for civilians was provided through their employer organisation); and mortality and cancer incidence data (follow-up data from national registries; provided through the national health service central registries).
Additional data included identity and test participation information provided independently by nuclear test veterans or their relatives and used (as detailed in the NRPB reports) to test the coverage of the data provided through the MOD as well as additional vital status information, used to ensure the completeness of follow-up and obtained through the Department for Work and Pensions (formerly the Department for Health and Social Security).
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the statement of 5 July 2012, Official Report, columns 1085-8, on Army 2020, whether he proposes that reservists will train with regular forces more often.
Peter Luff (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Defence Equipment, Support and Technology), Defence; Mid Worcestershire, Conservative)
As part of their fully integrated role under Army 2020, it is intended that from 2015 onwards, reservists will participate in the major regular exercises in larger numbers than they do currently. In addition, there will be increased sharing of instructors and resources, which will include regular participation in reserve training events, both routine and annual. The reserves will benefit from an extra £1.8 billion investment in training and equipment.
In the meantime, the Army has started overseas reserve training exercises at company level, with 26 exercises planned this year.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people he expects to be in the (a) reactive and (b) adaptable force at any one time; and what estimate he has made of the proportion of reserves in each such force.
Peter Luff (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Defence Equipment, Support and Technology), Defence; Mid Worcestershire, Conservative
Approximately 20,000 regular and 2,000 reserve personnel will be permanently allocated to the reaction force and approximately 12,500 regular and 8,000 reserve personnel will be permanently allocated to the adaptable force. The remaining personnel will be either supporting ‘Force Troops’ (which includes, for example, the artillery, engineers and intelligence units); or allocated to other front line tasks (such as the permanent presence in Cyprus); Falklands, or allocated to non-front line tasks (such as training).
Under the Army 2020 concept, the integrated army reserve will be ready and able to deploy routinely at sub-unit level and in some case as formed units on an enduring stabilisation operation as part of both reaction and adaptable forces.
Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the timetable is for the building and base porting of the proposed Type 26 frigates.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Type 26 Global Combat Ship (GCS) programme is in its assessment phase. The timetable for the build programme of the ships and where they will be based will be determined at the main investment decision, which is currently scheduled for the middle of the decade.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects HMS Argyll to be retired from service.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
On present planning assumptions, HMS Argyll, the oldest Type 23 in the fleet, will be withdrawn from service in 2023 having entered service in 1992.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many ships of each type are deployed on operations or exercises.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
As of 4 September 2012, the number of ships of each type deployed on operations or exercise is shown in the following tables:
| Ships on operations | |
| Type of ship | Number |
| Landing Platform Dock | 1 |
| Landing Platform Helicopter | 1 |
| Type 42 Destroyers | 1 |
| Type 45 Destroyers | 2 |
| Type 23 Frigates | 5 |
| Mine Counter Measure Vessels (Hunt) | 4 |
| Mine Counter Measure Vessels (Sandown) | 2 |
| River Class | 4 |
| P2000 Patrol Craft (Archer) | 6 |
| P2000 Patrol Craft (Scimitar) | 2 |
| Survey/Patrol Ships | 3 |
| Type 42 Destroyers | 1 |
| Type 45 Destroyers | 1 |
| Type 23 Frigates | 5 |
| Mine Counter Measure Vessels (Hunt) | 2 |
| Mine Counter Measure Vessels (Sandown) | 1 |
This information will change on a constant basis as ships move through their operational, training and maintenance cycles to meet operational requirements.
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has spent on long lead orders for Trident replacement submarines and nuclear weapons since May 2010.
Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
To date, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has spent £17.033 million on long lead items for the successor submarines. This spend is associated with the development of the Pressurised Water Reactor 3 plant to be used in the submarines.
The MOD has not spent any money on long lead items for nuclear weapons. The Strategic Defence and Security Review determined that a replacement warhead would not be required until the 2030s. Therefore the decision to refurbish or replace the existing warhead will not be required until the next Parliament.
Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what criteria he used to make the decision to disband the second battalion of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers;
(2) what representations he has received on his Department’s proposal to disband the second battalion of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
Against a backdrop of needing to remove five battalions from the infantry order of battle as part of the wider Army 2020 structure, a number of criteria were applied by the Army which were: maintaining a regimental system which is largely regionally aligned; demographic sustainability of regiments according to projected regional supply of recruits; proportionality of outcome, with no cap badge deletions and no regiment losing more than one battalion in a re-organisation; balancing the whole infantry structure to maintain variety of roles and parity of opportunity of experience for officers and soldiers; taking account of previous decisions on mergers and deletions; historical manning performance; and ensuring a solution that the Army would see as fair and equitable.
Based on demographic data available from the Office for National Statistics for the age cohort across the UK from which infantry recruits are drawn and historical trends in terms of the percentage of that cohort likely to join the Army, an assessment was made of which regiments were likely to be the least sustainable in the future if they retained their current structure. This work also included a comparison of each regiment’s historical outflow so the likely recruiting requirement could be determined.
The analysis showed that those regiments likely to be the least sustainable in future were the Royal Regiment of Scotland (predicted to be 1.75 battalions short), The Yorkshire Regiment (predicted to be 0.8 battalions short), The Mercian Regiment (predicted to be 0.56 battalions short) and the Royal Welsh Regiment (predicted to be 0.55 battalions short). It was therefore decided to remove one battalion from each of those regiments.
After the removal of four battalions, the method for predicting future sustainability became less statistically discerning. Therefore, to determine the fifth battalion to be removed from the order of battle, application of criteria that went wider than demographics was required. Historical manning performance and the need to maintain equity of opportunity meant that the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers (a two battalion regiment with average historical under-manning of 13.3% since the previous reorganisation of the infantry in 2007) was the next appropriate regiment from which to withdraw a battalion.
The analysis showed that after the withdrawal of five battalions from across the infantry, future manning should be sustainable with sufficient recruits predicted to fill the necessary posts.
To date, the Department has received around 35 representations from Members of Parliament, members of the public and one borough council in relation to the decision to withdraw The 2nd Battalion The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many weapons were used to defend the London 2012 Olympics from the air; what their locations were; and which areas in Greater London were undefended.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Home Office, through the police, had lead responsibility for ensuring the safety and security of the Olympic Games. The Ministry of Defence supported them and other civil and Olympic authorities, in a number of areas.
The air security of the entire United Kingdom including Greater London and its approaches is protected at all times by a multi-layered approach, including Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon aircraft based at RAF Coningsby and RAF Leuchars. The additional air security measures put in place for the Olympics built on those arrangements, to provide a flexible and proportionate response to protect the Olympic sites alongside Greater London and the rest of the United Kingdom.
The Olympic Air Security Plan included civil airspace restrictions around the Olympic sites, additional Typhoon aircraft at RAF Northolt and helicopters carrying RAF Regiment snipers based on HMS Ocean moored at Greenwich and at Ilford TA Centre. In the London area, Ground-Based Air Defence Rapier were also deployed to Barn Hill, William Girling Reservoir, Blackheath, and Oxleas Meadows, supplemented by High Velocity Missile systems deployed at the Fred Wigg Tower and Lexington Building.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate the value of the Marchwood Sea Mounting Centre.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
We do not routinely assess the current market value of our estate because the estimated receipts will depend on market conditions and other factors at the time of sale. Where pre-sale valuations have been obtained, these are regarded as commercially confidential and are thus not released ahead of the sale in case they influence the market.
Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion, Green)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) whether any (a) radioactive materials, (b) explosives and (c) hazardous chemicals were present in the building at the Atomic Weapons Establishment in which a fire occurred on 12 April 2012;
(2) how many (a) firefighting personnel and (b) fire appliances attended the incident at the Atomic Weapons Establishment on 12 April 2012;
(3) what the cause was of the fire at the Atomic Weapons Establishment on 12 April 2012 attended by the Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service; in which facility the incident occurred; what the extent was of any damage caused; and if he will make a statement.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The fire at the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) Aldermaston on 12 April 2012 was caused by the ignition of bearing grease within the ventilation extraction system of an AWE manufacturing facility. The resulting damage was localised to the fan itself. A total of 17 fire fighting personnel and three fire appliances attended the incident.
There were no radioactive materials or explosives present in the building where the fire occurred. Hazardous material was present in the building, but not in the part where the fire occurred. At no point was there any risk to the health of staff or the public.
Stephen Pound (Ealing North, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy that no autonomous weapons systems will be deployed in any operational theatre by UK armed forces without a prior report to Parliament.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The UK does not currently have any autonomous weapons systems—people are always involved in the decision-making process. All command decisions are, and will continue to be, based on Rules of Engagement which ensure adherence to the international laws of armed conflict.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to his announcement of 18 July 2012 on simplification of veterans’ disability payments, what definition he plans to use of a serious injury.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Under the new arrangements, seriously injured serving personnel and veterans will be those who receive an award from the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme which includes payment at tariff levels 1-8 or entitlement to a guaranteed income payment of 50% or higher.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to his announcement of 18 July 2012 on simplification of veterans’ disability payments, whether the arrangements will be applied retrospectively; and to what extent.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The arrangements to simplify the veterans’ disability payments will be in place for April 2013. There are no current plans to apply the new arrangements retrospectively.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to his announcement of 18 July 2012 on simplification of veterans’ disability payments, whether the payments will be equivalent to the amount which would have been paid under disability living allowance for (a) serious injury and (b) mental health.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Payments made to injured service personnel who are in receipt of an award from the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme for a serious injury (including mental health) will, under the simplification of veterans’ disability payments, continue to be at least the same amount as they are currently receiving under disability living allowance.
Richard Graham (Gloucester, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps his Department (a) has taken and (b) plans to take to ensure businesses that employ Territorial Army (TA) soldiers are not adversely affected by his Army 2020 plans for increased reliance on the TA.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
I refer my hon. Friend to the statement made by the Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend Mr Hammond, on 5 July 2012, Hansard, column 66WS, in which he said that delivering the step-change in the size and role of Reserves will require a change in the relationship between Defence, the employer and the Reservist. Employers play a key role in enabling reservists to take their place in the defence of the nation, but we need a new framework of partnership with public and private sector employers, that gives us the confidence that trained reservist manpower will be available when it is needed. We are examining how this might work through, for instance, the ‘Partnering for Talent’ programme, which seeks to identify clear business benefits for employers who support the Reserves.
The public sector is already a major employer of Reservists and should set an example. Cross-Government work, led by the Head of the Civil Service, is promoting the benefits of employing Reservists within Government and will take the lead on positive employer support of reservists. In addition, the Ministry of Defence works closely with the National Employers Advisory Board.
A Green Paper, setting out our proposals, is currently being prepared in order that consultation can take place during the autumn. This consultation will enable employers of Reservists to comment to the Ministry of Defence on the desired future relationships between employers and Reservists. It is intended that a new employer engagement strategy will follow thereafter.
George Freeman (Mid Norfolk, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) whether his Department has any plans to (a) organise and (b) be involved in trials to assess the potential effects of wind turbines under 15 metres in height on military radar; and if he will make a statement;
(2) whether he has had recent discussions with representatives of industry on the potential effects of wind turbines under 15 metres in height on military radar; and if he will make a statement;
(3) whether he has had recent discussions with his (a) US and (b) French counterparts on the potential effects of wind turbines under 15 metres in height on military radar; and if he will make a statement;
(4) with reference to the answer to the right hon. Member for East Yorkshire of 14 March 2012, Official Report, column 328W, on radar: wind power, whether the trial scheduled for July 2012 in relation to interference caused by wind turbines will assess the difference between turbines above and below 15 metres in height; and if he will make a statement.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has no current plans to organise any trials to assess the potential effects of wind turbines under 15 metres.
Wind farm developers are responsible for mitigating the effects of interference caused by wind farm turbines to military radars. These discussions have not specifically focused on wind turbines under 15 metres in height.
A number of trials of various potential wind turbine mitigation solutions is being conducted by industry, and the MOD continues to monitor their progress.
The MOD has not had discussions with its US and French counterparts on the potential effects of wind turbines under 15 metres in height on military radar.
The trial scheduled at the Remote Radar Head Trimingham for July was delayed due to insufficient wind turbines being constructed at the offshore wind farm. The trials have been rescheduled for later in the year.
Bob Ainsworth (Coventry North East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what role the Royal Navy has in international (a) counter-narcotics and (b) anti-piracy operations.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Royal Navy (RN) assists a wider defence support to Her Majesty’s Government counter-narcotics efforts. The RN has previously engaged in counter-narcotics operations, often alongside international partners, in the Caribbean, Atlantic and Indian oceans and will engage according to the appropriate conventions where there is a clear legal basis to do so.
The Royal Navy, including the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA), plays a significant role in international counter-piracy operations. The EU’s Operation Atalanta headquarters is based at Northwood, London and its operational commander is British.
The UK also provides the 1* commander and a ship to the US-led Combined Maritime Force (CMF), which conducts counter piracy operations as part of its maritime security role. The Royal Navy also provides naval assets where possible to deter and disrupt pirates at sea. In January this year, RFA Fort Victoria interdicted 14 suspected pirates, who have been successfully prosecuted in the Seychelles.
Madeleine Moon (Bridgend, Labour)
(1) what discussions he has had with his counterparts in the US administration on UK involvement in the testing of mission systems for the F35 Joint Strike Fighter; and if he will make a statement;
(2) what discussions he has had with his counterparts in the US administration on access to data recorded from mission systems of the F35 Joint Strike Fighter during flight to allow post-flight analysis; and if he will make a statement;
(3) pursuant to the answer of 10 July 2012, Official Report, column 202W, on military aircraft, what level of autonomy the UK will have over the operation of mission systems for the F35 Joint Strike Fighter; and if he will make a statement.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
As the only Tier 1 partner who has invested $2 billion in the Lightening II development, the UK is involved in the design and development of the F35 aircraft, including its mission systems. We have ensured that the design and integration of the aircraft’s mission systems meets our requirements. The UK has been directly involved with the aircraft development flight test programme and have access to data generated by the aircraft’s mission systems for post flight analysis. When the aircraft enters UK service we will have full autonomy over the operation of the mission systems.
Gordon Banks (Ochil and South Perthshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the answer of 23 April 2012, Official Report, column 714W, on AgustaWestland, when officials in his Department were first notified of AgustaWestland’s intent not to renew Vector Aerospace’s sub-contracts for support for Lynx and Sea King helicopters.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
Ministry of Defence officials were first briefed that AgustaWestland did not intend to renew Vector Aerospace’s sub-contracts for Sea King and Lynx component repair during a routine meeting on 30 September 2011. Discussions were subsequently held to better understand this intent and to secure assurances regarding ongoing affordability and contract performance.
Richard Graham (Gloucester, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what resources are available to members of the armed forces who are made redundant to assist them in finding new employment; and what plans he has for the future level of those resources.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
All those made redundant will qualify for the level of resettlement assistance associated with their length of service, and the engagement they could have expected to complete had they not been made redundant. This assistance is specifically designed to assist in finding new employment. The majority of those made redundant will qualify for the Full Resettlement Programme which comprises:
a three-day Career Transition Workshop;
the use of a career consultant;
access to a job finding service;
up to 35 days retraining time;
funding of up to £6,534;
access to a wide range of accredited vocational training courses and workshops;
resettlement support up to two years after leaving.
There are no plans to reduce this programme of support in the future.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been paid in redundancy compensation to those made redundant (a) voluntarily and (b) compulsorily in (i) Tranche 1, (ii) Tranche 2 and (iii) Tranche 3 of the Armed Forces Redundancy Programme in each of the services.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The Armed Forces Redundancy Programme is ongoing and the total costs in respect of redundancy compensation payments will not be known for some time. However, the costs in respect of tranche 1, representing 2,835 personnel, amount to some £102 million.
Alex Cunningham (Stockton North, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many personnel under the age of 18 form part of the trained strength of each service.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The position as at 1 July 2012 is set out in the following table:
| Service | Total |
| Royal Navy | — |
| Army | 140 |
| Royal Air Force | 10 |
| ‘—’ Denotes zero or rounded to zero. Note: Data have been rounded to the nearest 10. Numbers ending in “5” have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias. | |
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for how many years his Department leased helicopters for use in Belize; and if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of such leases.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence leased helicopters in support operations at the British Army Training Support Unit Belize (BATSUB) for eight years (between 2003 and 2011) at a cost of some £24 million (excluding VAT).
Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent progress has been made on Franco-British defence co-operation; and if he will make a statement.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The three strands of defence co-operation with France set out in the Lancaster House treaties of 2010 remain on track and we continue to work closely with the French Government and armed forces at all levels.
Our military to military links are being reinforced by the arrival of additional exchange officers in France and their counterparts in the UK. Exercise Corsican Lion in October 2012 will be a major naval exercise that will demonstrate the combined power of both nations’ armed forces and help to enhance interoperability.
In July we signed two agreements with France to enable co-operation on Unmanned Air Systems (drones). Other areas of equipment co-operation include missiles, maritime mine countermeasures, A400M transport aircraft support, satellite communications, and submarine technologies.
We continue to make progress on the second treaty relating to collaboration on hydro-dynamics research. The planned Teutates Technology Development Centre, is to be built at the Atomic Weapons Establishment Aldermaston, and the Teutates Epure facility, is to be built in Valduc, France. These have now moved from the concept phase to the assessment phase with “initial gate” approval. We expect they will be operational from 2015.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many contracts his Department has held with G4S in each of the last five years; and what the (a) purpose, (b) monetary value and (c) location of stationed guards for each such contract was.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence has held 18 contracts with G4S over the last five years, of which seven remain current. Details are shown in the following table:
| Contract number | Contract title | Start date | End date | Contract value (£) |
| DCSALA1/1954 | Flexible working hours system upgrade | 1 July 2007 | 31 March 2008 | 431 |
| STRATSYS/0097 | Installation | 4 July 2007 | 30 November 2007 | 39,227 |
| CTLBC/356 | Provision of site protection services at Saxa Vord | 31 July 2007 | 31 October 2007 | 6,454 |
| LAND/AIO/5261 | Provision of demonstration troops, population and opposition forces in support of pre-deployment training | 21 September 2007 | 31 March 2012 | 29,969,557 |
| CTLBC/413 | Provision of site protection services at Saxa Vord | 1 November 2007 | 17 December 2010 | 92,079 |
| FLEET/OPS/0142 | Operational training for RN personnel due to deploy | 19 November 2008 | 31 October 2009 | 120,000 |
| CTLBC/695/3 | Provision of security guarding framework agreement | 26 January 2009 | 25 January 2013 | 1,000,000 |
| CS4D/1245C | Army UK guarding enabling arrangement | 16 February 2009 | 15 February 2013 | 1,470,253 |
| CS4D/1326 | Cash conveyance at Army Training Centres Pirbright and Winchester | 31 March 2009 | 30 April 2014 | 19,104 |
| RM464C/16/G4S | Buying Solutions framework—learning and development and e-learning solutions—management and leadership | 1 July 2009 | 31 March 2010 | 209,000 |
| CTLBC/1084 | Provision of two trained HOLMES 2 Operatives for the MOD Police and Guarding Agency | 10 July 2009 | 15 January 2010 | 56,756 |
| CTLBC/1263 | Provision of three trained HOLMES 2 Operatives for the MOD Police and Guarding Agency | 20 January 2010 | 20 July 2010 | 62,079 |
| CTLBC/1091 | Administration service for the Armed Forces Enhanced Learning Scheme | 10 Mar 10 | 31 March 2014 | 1,312,718 |
| HQLF1/94 | Provision of casualty simulation | 31 August 2010 | 31 March 2012 | 709,080 |
| HQLF2/1826 | Civilian Investigator Support to Iraq Historic Allegations Team | 19 October 2010 | 31 October 2012 | 3,304,342 |
| CTLBC/1847 | Provision of site protection services at Shepherds Grove | 22 December 2011 | 31 March 2012 | 38,812 |
| HQLF2/1850 | Provision of civilian investigator support to the Royal Military Police Special Investigation Branch (UK) | 24 January 2012 | 31 March 2013 | 2,032,154 |
| ACT/03973 | Provision of trauma casualty amputees in support of RAF pre-deployment training | 6 July 2012 | 31 March 2014 | 74,339 |
Only five of these contracts involved the provision of guarding services, the locations of which are shown in the following table:
| Contract number | Contract title | Guarding locations |
| CTLBC/356 | Provision of site protection services at Saxa Vord | RAF Saxa Vord |
| CTLBC/413 | Provision of site protection services at Saxa Vord | RAF Saxa Vord |
| CTLBC/695/3 | Provision of security guarding framework agreement—but not in use | St George’s Court |
| London School of Army Aviation, Middle Wallop | ||
| Defence School of Languages, Beaconsfield | ||
| Defence Academy, Shrivenham | ||
| Didcot, Oxfordshire | ||
| CS4D/1245C | Army UK guarding enabling arrangement—but not in use | St George’s and St David’s Barracks, Bicester |
| Combermere Barracks, Windsor | ||
| Penhale Camp, Newquay | ||
| Fremmington Camp, Devon | ||
| St Omer Barracks, Aldershot | ||
| Invicta Park Barracks, Maidstone | ||
| Victoria Barracks, Windsor | ||
| Clive Barracks, Market Drayton | ||
| CTLBC/1847 | Provision of site protection services at Shepherds Grove | RAF Shepherds Grove |
CTLBC/695/3 and CS4D/1245C are framework arrangements that have the potential to let tasking at other sites across the UK during the life of the contracts.
Bob Russell (Colchester, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many contracts at the Colchester Garrison have been awarded to G4S.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) contracts database lists no contracts that have been awarded to G4S for activities undertaken at Colchester Garrison within the last 10 years.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) whether Ministers in his Department sought advice from marine archaeologists on Marine Heritage Foundation’s involvement with the site of HMS Victory 1744;
(2) what his Department’s policy is on the de-accession of historic naval and military artefacts; and what assessment he has made of whether Odyssey Marine Exploration’s policy on de-accessioning artefacts from the site of HMS Victory 1744 is in conformity with his Department’s policy;
(3) what due diligence his Department conducted in respect of Marine Heritage Foundation’s involvement with the site of HMS Victory 1744;
(4) what due diligence his Department conducted on Marine Heritage Foundation’s involvement with the site of HMS Victory 1744;
(5) what plans there are for the future of the site of HMS Victory 1744;
(6) what recent representations he has had on the work being conducted on the site of HMS Victory 1744.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
I refer the right hon. Member to the reply given by my noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Lord Astor of Hever, in the other place on 22 May 2012, Hansard, House of Lords, column WA49.
The Government is currently considering a proposal by the Foundation for work on the wreck site, informed by a recommendation by the Advisory Group. In addition, we have received representations from a wide range of interested parties. I hope to be able to announce the Government’s decision shortly.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what commercial relationship his Department has with Odyssey Marine Exploration in respect of the site of HMS Victory 1744.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence has no commercial relationship with Odyssey Marine Exploration in respect of the site of Victory 1744.
Any physical activity undertaken on the site will require the prior consent of the Secretary of State.
Andrew Smith (Oxford East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether (a) his Department and (b) the armed forces provided advice or training to Indonesian security and defence forces in the last five years.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) continues to provide advice and training to the Indonesian Defence of Security forces in support of Indonesia’s security sector reform process. This includes places on MOD courses in the UK, the local provision of defence education, senior officials’ level engagement and training on conducting Peace Support Operations and maritime/border security.
Bob Russell (Colchester, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether any members of HM armed forces have been attached to the Israeli armed forces in each of the last five years.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
No members of the armed forces have been attached to the Israeli armed forces in the past five years.
Bob Russell (Colchester, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether any members of the Israeli armed forces and security forces have attended training courses in the UK provided by his Department in each of the last five years.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
Members of the Israeli Defence Force attended UK defence education courses in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2012.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate the value of the assets and property at each location of the Royal Navy Museums and the Royal Air Force Museums.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The total net book value for the Royal Navy museums, as at 31 March 2011, is £23.386 million. This is taken from the 2010-11 audited accounts and is broken down by each of the Royal Navy museums in the following table. For the 2011-12 accounts all Royal Navy assets are consolidated under the National Museum of the Royal Navy.
| £ million | ||
| Museum | Land and buildings | Other assets |
| Royal Naval Museum | 2.352 | 1.524 |
| Royal Marines Museum | 4.387 | 0.782 |
| Submarine Museum | 2.923 | 1.143 |
| Fleet Air Arm Museum | 6,861 | 3.414 |
The total net book value of the RAF museum as at 31 March 2011 is £61,614,018. However, it should be noted that although the top level figures are held within the Ministry of Defence, the assets themselves are owned by the RAF Museum. The MOD does not hold the detailed breakdown between the two sites at Hendon and Cosford.
This information is in the public domain and can be found on:
www.official-documents.gov.uk
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what personal contribution volunteer reservists have been required to make towards travel to their place of duty since April 2011;
(2) what changes have been made to travel contributions for volunteer reservists since April 2011.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Service personnel, including the volunteer reserve, are in some cases able to claim home to duty travel allowance (HDT). This allowance requires a daily personal contribution to the cost of the journeys to work for which they make a claim. In April 2011 the HDT claim could be made for every mile after the first. Since 1 May 2011, the personal contribution to home to duty travel allowance distance has been increased from one mile to three miles. The volunteer reserve may claim HDT when travelling from home or their normal civilian place of work to attend training.
In April 2011 the personal contribution ranged from 18p per day to 50p subject to the mode of transport. From 1 May 2011 the contributions increased to range from 53p to £1.50, still based on transport type.
There were further planned incremental increases to this qualifying distance taking it to six miles from 1 April 2012 and nine miles in 2013. I am pleased to confirm that these measures are no longer deemed necessary, so the three-mile qualifying distance remains extant.
Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what the fully manned establishment is of the Submarine Service;
(2) how many nuclear engineers are available to the Submarine Service; and if he will make a statement;
(3) what recent assessment he has made of manning levels in the Submarine Service; and if he will make a statement.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Manpower levels within the Submarine Service are monitored on a monthly basis in order that management action can be taken to match strength to the Naval Service requirement.
The fully manned establishment of the Royal Navy Submarine Service is 4,053 trained officers and ratings and the Royal Navy currently has 1,490 trained nuclear engineers (including nuclear technicians).
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) how many personnel in the Syrian armed forces were trained by the UK armed forces by (a) rank, (b) location of training and (c) duration of training in each of the last 10 years;
(2) what training his Department provided to Syrian armed forces personnel in each of the last 10 years;
(3) what the cost was to the public purse of training Syrian armed forces personnel in each of the last 10 years;
(4) whether any personnel from the Syrian armed forces being trained in the UK have claimed political asylum;
(5) how much money his Department has received from the Syrian government for training its armed forces personnel in each of the last 10 years;
(6) what rank and positions were held by Syrian armed forces personnel who have been trained in the UK in the last 10 years (a) at the time of their enrolment for training and (b) now.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence has a long tradition of providing defence education to international military personnel at its training establishments throughout the United Kingdom. Over the period in question, the UK has provided the following training to five Syrian armed forces personnel:
2003 to 2004: One Syrian officer cadet completed the commissioning course at The Royal Military Academy Sandhurst (RMAS) at a cost of approximately £40,000.
2004 to 2005: A Syrian lieutenant colonel attended the advanced command and staff course at the Defence Academy in Shrivenham, and associated language training at a cost of £69,000.
2005 to 2006: Two Syrian lieutenant colonels attended the diploma in Defence Diplomacy course, which was subsequently renamed as the Managing Defence in a Wider Security Context. The cost of both officers was £10,600.
2008: One Syrian colonel attended the Managing Defence in a Wider Security Context course, at a cost of £7,300.
No personnel from the Syrian armed forces being trained in the UK have claimed political asylum while undergoing training in the UK.
The Ministry of Defence has received no money from the Syrian Government in respect of this training.
As the British embassy in Damascus was closed on 29 February 2012, there is currently no mechanism for ascertaining either the current ranks or positions of these five individuals.
In view of the current circumstances in Syria, the UK is not providing any defence education to Syrian armed forces personnel.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy that any plans to intervene in (a) Syria and (b) other countries with military action involving (i) USAF Lakenheath and (ii) other US bases in the UK will be brought before hon. Members for debate and decision.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The potential use of bases in the United Kingdom by United States forces would be a matter for joint decision by the two Governments in light of the circumstances prevailing at the time.
Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry, DUP)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what level of recognition payments were made to part-time members of the Ulster Defence Regiment; who was eligible for such payments; and whether any other types of recognition payments will be considered.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
Part-time members of the Ulster Defence Regiment who transferred over to the Royal Irish Regiment Home Service in 1992 and were in service on 31 August 2006, received an ex-gratia payment which was part of a package intended to recognise the unique circumstances surrounding the disbandment of the home service element of the regiment. The criteria for this payment would not therefore have been applicable to former part-time members of the Ulster Defence Regiment who left prior to that qualifying date.
Other types of payments, where appropriate, will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what assets have been assigned to (a) Standing NATO Maritime Group 1, (b) Standing NATO Maritime Group 2, (c) Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group 1 and (d) Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group 2 in the last seven years; and for how long they were assigned to each such group;
(2) what assets have been requested by (a) Standing NATO Maritime Group 1, (b) Standing NATO Maritime Group 2, (c) Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group 1 and (d) Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group 2 for future deployment.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The following table shows the frigates or destroyers assigned to the Standing NATO Maritime Groups in the last seven years. Where there are two ships assigned in one year the periods of support is six months per ship.
| Standing NATO Mine Group 1 | Standing NATO Mine Group 2 | |
| 2006 | Nil | HMS Nottingham HMS York |
| 2007 | HMS Montrose | HMS Northumberland |
| 2008 | HMS Somerset | HMS Cumberland |
| 2009 | HMS St Albans | HMS Cornwall |
| 2010 | Nil | HMS Chatham HMS Montrose |
| 2011 | Nil | Nil |
| 2012 | Nil | Nil |
In 2011, the ship assigned was re-tasked to the NATO Operation Unified Protector. Since that time no dedicated ship has been assigned to Standing NATO Mine Group 1 or 2. The Royal Navy continues to offer a frigate or destroyer to NATO Immediate Reaction Force activation as required.
The following table shows the mine counter measures (MCM) vessels and coastal survey vessel assigned to the Standing NATO Mine Counter Measures Groups (SNMCMG) in the last seven years. The MCMs have undertaken varying periods of support from four to 12 month deployments.
| SNMCMG 1 | SNMCMG 2 | |
| 2006 | HMS Hurworth | — |
| 2007 | HMS Brocklesby | — |
| HMS Middleton | — | |
| 2008 | HMS Roebuck | — |
| HMS Hurworth | — | |
| HMS Ledbury | — | |
| 2009 | HMS Brocklesby | — |
| HMS Quorn | — | |
| 2010 | HMS Blyth | — |
| HMS Penzance | — | |
| 2011 | HMS Brocklesby | HMS Brocklesby |
| — | HMS Bangor | |
| 2012 | — | HMS Ledbury |
| — | HMS Blyth |
SNMG MCM Group deployments for the future have been planned with three units of four month deployments allocated per year from 2013 to 2018.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) whether length of service was a consideration in the selection of individuals for redundancy announcements made in tranches 1 and 2;
(2) if length of service was a consideration in the selection of individuals for redundancy announcements made in Tranches 1 and 2 of the Armed Forces Redundancy Programme;
(3) whether his Department took length of service into consideration when determining the redundancies to be made in Tranches 1 and 2.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
No. We have been clear that the length of service was not a consideration in the selection of individuals for redundancy and we have worked hard to ensure that that many more individuals have received an immediate income for which they otherwise would not have qualified. Only 1.2% of individuals who have been selected for redundancy are within one year of qualifying for their immediate pension. These personnel will receive a significantly larger tax free lump sum, which could total over £100,000, and still get all their accrued pension rights at the age of 60 or 65.
Bob Ainsworth (Coventry North East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many senior responsible owners have been designated within his Department; and to which project each such person is currently assigned.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The Permanent Secretary has appointed 16 senior responsible owners, who are responsible to the Defence Board, and who currently lead 18 major business change and military capability programmes, which are as follows:
Army 2020
Asset Management Programme (AMP)
Basing Optimisation Programme (BOP) (formal appointment pending)
BORONA (formal appointment pending)
Carrier Enabled Power Projection (CEPP) (formal appointment pending)
Corporate Services Systems Convergence Programme (CSSCP)
Corporate Services Transformation Programme (CSTP)
Defence Core Network Services (DCNS)
Defence Cyber Security Programme (DCSP) (formal appointment pending)
Defence Information Infrastructure (DII)
Defence Infrastructure Transformation Programme (DITP)
Defence Reform Programme (DRP)
Future Reserves 2020 (FR20)
Logistics Commodities Services Transformation (LCST)
New Employment Model (NEM)
Submarine Enterprise Performance Programme (SEPP)
Successor Deterrent Submarine Programme (SDSP)
The Materiel Strategy (TMS) (formal appointment pending).
Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr, Plaid Cymru)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans his Department has for the development of unmanned aerial vehicle technology at Parc Aberporth; and if he will make a statement.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
There are currently no plans for the Parc Aberporth facility to be used in the further development of Unmanned Air Systems, following the completion of the flight trials of all Watchkeeper production aircraft in 2015.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) which ships will be upgraded under the Combat Management System Joint Support Solution; what systems will be installed on each ship; and when each such installation will (a) begin and (b) be completed;
(2) if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of implementing the Combat Management System Joint Support Solution (a) in total and (b) for each vessel to be upgraded under that contract.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The Combat Management System Joint Support Solution is a contract between the Ministry of Defence and BAE Systems Integrated Systems Technology Ltd, awarded in December 2010, which provides support for on board Combat Systems by effectively managing spares and obsolescence.
The contract value is up to £49 million over its six year duration and covers a total of 23 ships (13 Type 23 frigates, six Type 45 destroyers, HMS Ocean, HMS Bulwark, HMS Albion and RFA Argus).
The contract does not separately identify the cost of supporting each individual ship.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what assessment he has made of the implications for the armed forces of reports of a fault with the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile’s rocket motors;
(2) how many Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles the Royal Air Force has available for use; and when the most recent missile was delivered;
(3) how many successful firings of the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile have taken place for each model of missile and aircraft type it was fired from in each of the last eight years.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The most recent Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) was delivered to the UK on 25 October 2006. The Ministry of Defence does not comment on the specific number of its weapons systems stockpiles as disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.
The AMRAAM system is subjected to regular and rigorous testing throughout its life. These weapons are not affected by an alleged fault on new production rocket motors that has been reported in the media. There are no plans to procure any additional AMRAAM systems, as they will be replaced in due course by the new Meteor missile that is in the final stages of development.
Trial firings of AMRAAM in each of the last eight years and the type of aircraft from which they were fired are shown in the following table:
| Typhoon | Tornado F3 | Sea Harrier | ||||
| AIM-120B | AIM-120C-5 | AIM-120B | AIM-120C-5 | AIM-120B | AIM-120C-5 | |
| 2004 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| 2005 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
All firings have been successful. No operational firings have taken place.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what collaborative works his Department is undertaking with the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence currently has no specific active project arrangements or information exchanges with the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Satcom kits were purchased for the R1 Sentinel in the latest period for which figures are available; and what the average cost was per unit.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
Five satellite communications systems were purchased, one for each of the Sentinel R1 aircraft. An average cost per unit is not available. The prime contract to design, supply and support the aircraft did not require the costs of the satellite communications systems to be separately identified.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what equipment from Type 23 vessels will be transferred to Type 26 vessels; what the value is of such equipment; and what the cost will be of transferring such equipment.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence plans to maximise the use of proven Type 23 (T23s) equipment in the future Type 26 Global Combat Ships (T26 GCS) to minimise cost and technical risk. This will include using, wherever possible, the physical transfer of equipment from the decommissioned T23s to the T26 GCS. The extent of this transfer is being explored as part of the ongoing T26 GCS Assessment Phase to ensure such an approach is best value for money for defence.
Decisions about the scope of technology and equipment transfer will be taken at the main investment decision, which is currently scheduled for the middle of this decade.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what comparative assessment he has made of the (a) size of radar signature, (b) ability to penetrate hostile airspace at low-level and (c) ability to land on rough short airstrips of the A400M and C-130J aircraft.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my predecessor, my hon. Friend Peter Luff, on 19 June 2012, Hansard, column 935W. This highlighted the ongoing A400M Atlas multinational trial programme which will cover the ability of the aircraft to use rough landing strips. There is also a plan to assess the radar cross-section of the A400M Atlas; the radar cross-sections of the C-130J and K are already known. Once this study is complete, a comparative assessment of the A400M Atlas and both C-130 Hercules variants could be made. The ability of A400M Atlas to fly at low-level is also being evaluated by Airbus. This information, when combined with the radar cross-section data, will allow an assessment to be made of the aircraft’s ability to penetrate hostile airspace at low-level.
Once these trials are completed by Airbus and the results evaluated, the outcome will be presented to A400M Atlas partner nations. They will collectively make an assessment of this information and whether the aircraft’s performance meets the agreed requirement. No conclusions can yet be drawn in comparative terms of the performances of the A400M Atlas and C-130J Hercules.
Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the average processing time was for enquiries received by (a) telephone, (b) email and (c) post at the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency in each of the last 24 months for which figures are available.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Where available data held on the average processing time for inquiries received by the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA) is shown in the table.
It is not possible to provide the average processing time for letters and e-mails received by either the Joint Personnel Administration Centre (JPAC) or other functional areas within SPVA as the data for these is not held in this format.
The latter includes addressing claims under the War Pension Scheme and Armed Forces Compensation Scheme, many of which require detailed investigation.
| Veterans Helpline | JPAC | ||||
| Month | Tel (Mins) | Letters (Working days) | E-mails (Working days) | Tel (Mins) | |
| 2010 | September | 3.03 | 3.6 | 1.7 | 4.33 |
| October | 3.02 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 4.08 | |
| November | 3.03 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 3.51 | |
| December | 3.05 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 3.45 | |
| 2011 | January | 3.04 | 2.9 | 1.4 | 3.54 |
| February | 3.05 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 4.22 | |
| March | 3.00 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 4.18 | |
| April | 2.56 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 4.06 | |
| May | 3.04 | 2 | 1.5 | 4.17 | |
| June | 3.07 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 4.21 | |
| July | 3.05 | 3 | 1.3 | 4.20 | |
| August | 3.15 | 2.8 | 1.4 | 4.09 | |
| September | 3.10 | 2.1 | 1.8 | 4.07 | |
| October | 3.16 | 2.9 | 1.5 | 3.57 | |
| November | 3.16 | 2.6 | 1.5 | 3.46 | |
| December | 3.10 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 3.53 | |
| 2012 | January | 3.21 | 2 | 1.2 | 3.51 |
| February | 3.34 | 2.4 | 1.3 | 3.58 | |
| March | 3.26 | 3.4 | 1.7 | 4.08 | |
| April | 3.46 | 3.3 | 2.6 | 4.08 | |
| May | 4.40 | 3.9 | 2.1 | 4.07 | |
| June | 3.39 | 2.8 | 2.6 | 4.04 | |
| July | 4.02 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 4.02 | |
| August | 3.48 | 3.3 | 2.9 | 4.03 |
Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how his Department ensures that service personnel and veterans who use the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA) are satisfied with the standard of service which they receive from the SPVA.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA) conducts an annual customer satisfaction survey with service personnel, veterans and its corporate customers.
Service personnel have been surveyed via the Joint Personnel Administration system since it was rolled out in 2007. The 2011 survey recorded an 85% overall satisfaction with SPVA services.
In January each year, a random selection of some 13,000 veterans are invited to either complete a hard copy of the Veterans Survey or online via the Veterans UK website. The 2011 Veterans Survey recorded a 92% overall satisfaction with SPVA services.
On an annual basis, a senior representative of SPVA’s 12 corporate customers are invited to be interviewed. The 2011 survey recorded a 75% overall satisfaction with services provided by SPVA.
The SPVA overall target for achievement of customer satisfaction is 80% with no less than 70% satisfaction in each of the three separate customer segments. The SPVA’s combined assessment for 2011 was 84.22%.
Iain Wright (Hartlepool, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to celebrate the centenary of the creation of the Royal Air Force.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Plans to celebrate the centenary of the Royal Air Force in 2018 have yet to be formulated. These celebrations are likely to form part of the wider commemoration of the first world war.
Dan Jarvis (Barnsley Central, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful applications to join the Territorial Army (TA) have been made since May 2010; and whether his Department plans to increase funding for TA recruitment campaigns.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
There have been approximately 11,000 successful applications and 3,000 unsuccessful applications to join the Territorial Army (TA) since May 2010. As part of the Future Reserves 2020, the Army plan to spend £5 million in financial year (FY) 2012-13 on the TA recruiting campaign and are now drawing up plans for the marketing campaigns in FY 2013-14.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what assessment he has made of the potential effect on the UK’s NATO commitments of planned reductions in spending on the UK National Codification Bureau;
(2) how many jobs will be lost from (a) the UK National Codification Bureau and (b) Ministry of Defence Abbey Wood, Bristol in the period from 2012 to 2015;
(3) what consultations he has held with trade unions about the proposed transfer of staff from the UK National Codification Bureau to Ministry of Defence Abbey Wood, Bristol;
(4) how many jobs are being transferred from the UK National Codification Bureau to Ministry of Defence Abbey Wood, Bristol.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The UK currently meets all of its NATO commitments with respect to codification and will continue to do so.
Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S), currently employs approximately 17,400 people. Following the Strategic Defence and Security Review announcement in October 2010, the total number of staff within DE&S is expected to reduce to approximately 14,400 by the end of financial year 2014-15. The number of overall jobs that will be based at the DE&S Abbey Wood site in 2015 has yet to be determined.
The MOD is considering the future size and shape of the UK National Codification Bureau and the Engineering and Through Life Support Team. A decision on the future of both organisations is expected to be announced shortly. Recognised trade union consultations are being undertaken.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what training has taken place at British Army Training Support Unit Belize since July 2011; and if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of such training.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
Following the cessation of infantry training exercises on 15 July 2011, routine training activities in Belize have been temporarily suspended as planned. However, other training has and will continue to take place in Belize on a much reduced basis as required by units, for example in individual and collective tropical training techniques, of which three such company level infantry exercises have taken place since mid- July 2011.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to make a decision on the Maritime Indirect Fire System; and what estimate he has made of the unit cost of such a system.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
A decision on the Assessment Phase for the Maritime Indirect Fire System (MIFS) project is likely to be taken by the end of the year, but the main investment decision point for the whole Type 26 Global Combat Ship programme, of which MIFS is a constituent part, is not expected until the middle of the decade. Given the status of the project, I am withholding the information regarding unit cost of the MIFS system as its disclosure would prejudice commercial interests.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what assessment he has made of the SC-130J aircraft’s suitability as a maritime patrol aircraft;
(2) what assessment he has made of C-295 aircraft’s ability to collect and process (a) magnetic anomaly data, (b) bathymetric data and (c) specific sonar data collected from sonar buoys;
(3) what discussions he has had with European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company on the procurement of the C-295 maritime patrol aircraft;
(4) what assessment he has made of the C-295′s suitability for anti-submarine warfare including the delivery of (a) stand-off weapons and (b) sonar buoys.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
Aircraft such as the SC-130J and C-295 are not currently being actively considered as we have not defined our requirement for a future Maritime Patrol Aircraft capability. A decision on any future requirement will not be made until the strategic defence and security review in 2015.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with (a) the US military and (b) other US authorities on military intervention in Syria using (i) USAF Lakenheath and (b) other US bases in the UK; and whether the UK must give permission for the bases to be used for such purposes.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The United Kingdom continues to work with other countries to achieve a diplomatic solution to the situation in Syria. The Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend Mr Hammond, has not had any specific discussions with the US military or other US authorities on the use of USAF Lakenheath or other US bases in the UK for military intervention in Syria. He has, however, discussed the situation in Syria with US counterparts in the course of normal ministerial business.
I refer the hon. Member to the statement made by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), on 3 September 2012, Hansard, column 53, in which he said that our objective remains an end to the violence and a transition to a more democratic and stable Syria. That is the only way to avoid protracted civil war, the collapse of the Syrian state, an even greater exodus of refugees, and further appalling loss of life. That is not just our view or the view of other western countries; it is the view of the Arab League and the vast majority of UN member states.
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps her Department takes to ensure co-ordination with the Ministry of Defence on training on humanitarian airdrop or relief operations.
Alan Duncan (Minister of State, International Development; Rutland and Melton, Conservative)
DFID and Ministry of Defence (MOD) co-operate closely on international humanitarian relief. For example, Royal Air Force Chinook helicopters assisted in delivering humanitarian supplies in Pakistan after the earthquake in 2005 and the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship Largs Bay assisted in Haiti in 2010. DFID has a memorandum of understanding with the MOD in order to ensure efficient and effective co-operation and employment of assets if the need is identified. We work together in line with internationally agreed humanitarian guidelines.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) how many Libyan armed forces personnel of each rank were trained by the UK armed forces in each of the last 10 years; where such training took place; and what the duration was of such training;
(2) what training his Department gave to Libyan armed forces personnel in each of the last 10 years.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence has a long tradition of providing defence education to international military personnel at its training establishments throughout the United Kingdom.
All overseas requests for defence training are considered on a case-by-case basis and it would not be provided if we thought such training would lead to human rights abuses. Providing defence training and education to overseas armed forces personnel at the same high standards used by UK armed forces helps build professionalism, accountability and raises awareness of human rights. It also helps build stability overseas as part of the Government’s wider foreign policy goals.
The following table lists Libyan personnel who have received military education and training from the UK since 2005, when centralised records were introduced:
| Date | Course | Location | Rank |
| 2005 | |||
| January to December | Royal College of Defence Studies | Seaford House, London | Colonel |
| 3 May to 10 June | English for Advanced Command and Staff Course Phase 1 | Defence School of Languages | Colonel |
| 13 June to 21 July | English for Advanced Command and Staff Course Phase 2 | Defence School of Languages | Colonel |
| 8 August to 21 July | Advanced Command and Staff Course | Joint Command and Staff College | Colonel |
| 1 September to 12 August | MSc in Managing Defence in a Democracy | Cranfield University, Shrivenham | 2 x Lieutenant Colonel |
| 2006 | |||
| January to March | British Military English | York St John University | First Lieutenant |
| 30 October to 10 November | International Border Security and Management Briefing | HQ Land Warfare Centre | 3 x Colonel Lieutenant Colonel |
| 2 x Major | |||
| 2007 | |||
| 19 February to 14 December | General English | York St John University | Staff Sergeant |
| 1 Lieutenant | |||
| Corporal | |||
| Captain | |||
| 3 April to 21 December | General English | York St John University | 4 x civilian |
| 6 x Lieutenant | |||
| 29 October to 22 February | British Military English | Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth | 1 Lieutenant |
| 2008 | |||
| 25 February to 24 October | RN Young Officer Course | Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth | 1 Lieutenant |
| 2009 | |||
| 4 January to 11 December | Army Commissioning Course | Royal Military Academy Sandhurst | Officer Cadet |
| 5 January to 26 April | British Military English | Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth | 1 Lieutenant |
| 2011 | |||
| — | English language | De Montfort University | 2 x Officer Cadet |
| 2012 | |||
| 12 March to 27 April | Managing Defence in the Wider Security Context | Defence Academy—Shrivenham | 2 x Colonel |
| 18 March to 22 March | EEZ Management Course | Held in Cairo | 2 x Commander |
| 1 April to 15 May | English language training | Janzour Naval Academy—Libya | 14 x Lieutenant Colonels |
| 30 April to 4 May | EEZ Management Course | Held in Malta | 2 x Commander |
| Lieutenant | |||
| 11 June to 6 July | EEZ Protection Officers Course | HMS Collingwood | Lieutenant |
| Commandeer | |||
| Lieutenant |
| 10 September 2012 to 19 April 2013 | RN Young Officer Course | Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth | 2 x Officer Cadet |
| 20 September 2012 to 20 September 2013 | Bespoke English language training course | De Montfort University | 6 x non-commissioned |
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of training Libyan armed forces personnel in each of the last 10 years.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence has a long tradition of providing defence education to international military personnel at its training establishments throughout the United Kingdom. Since 2005, when centralised records were introduced, the cost to the Defence budget and to tri-departmental conflict pool funds of such training for Libya has been £640,000.
All overseas requests for defence training are considered on a case-by-case basis and it would not be provided if we thought such training would lead to human rights abuses. Providing defence training and education to overseas armed forces personnel at the same high standards used by UK armed forces helps build professionalism, accountability and raises awareness of human rights. It also helps build stability overseas as part of the Government’s wider foreign policy goals.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the annual cost in each category of expenditure is of (a) RAF Leuchars, (b) HMNB Clyde, (c) RM Condor, (d) Headquarters 2nd Division, (e) Headquarters 51 Brigade, (f) Redford Barracks, (g) Dreghorn Barracks, (h) RAF Kinloss and (i) Fort George barracks.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The cost in financial year 2011-12 by category of expenditure is shown in the following table:
| £ million | |||||||||
| RAF Leuchars | HMNB Clyde | RM Condor | Headquarters 2nd Division | Headquarters 51 Brigade | Redford Barracks | Dreghorn Barracks | RAF Kinloss | Fort GeorgeBarracks | |
| Personnel | 41.9 | 39.0 | 26.3 | 5.9 | 2.8 | — | — | 37.4 | — |
| Infrastructure | 9.2 | 5.3 | 5.6 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 7.6 | 0.7 |
| Other | 11.0 | 241.0 | 0.4 | 2.7 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 1.1 | 0.2 |
| Total | 62.1 | 285.3 | 32.3 | 9.4 | 3.7 | 2.3 | 1.5 | 46.1 | 0.9 |
| Note: Numbers are rounded to the nearest £0.1 million. | |||||||||
The personnel costs of Redford Barracks, Dreghorn Barracks and Fort George Barracks are included in the costs of Headquarters 2nd Division.
Headquarters 2nd Division, Redford Barracks, Dreghorn Barracks, Fort George Barracks and Headquarters 51 Brigade are covered by a single contract for utilities and other services. The cost of this contract cannot be broken down by site, but the total value is around £9 million per year. This figure is not included in the table.
The costs of providing Service Family Accommodation cannot be attributed to each location individually as they are managed by region. The total cost of providing accommodation in Scotland is around £15 million per year.
Bob Ainsworth (Coventry North East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has saved as a result of non-front line costs savings in (a) 2010-11 and (b) 2011-12; and how much he estimates his Department will save in (i) 2012-13, (ii) 2013-14 and (iii) 2014-15.
Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
The Ministry of Defence has committed to saving £4.3 billion in non-front line savings over the spending review period. This commitment formed part of the spending review conducted in autumn of 2010. The measures that would deliver these savings were decided in the Strategic Defence and Security Review, with further savings being identified in Planning Round 12. Measures were therefore not tracked until 2011-12.
Forecast savings are:
£ million |
|
| 2011-12 | 340 |
| 2012-13 | 700 |
| 2013-14 | 1,310 |
| 2014-15 | 2,050 |
| Total | 4,400 |
Figures are rounded to the nearest £10 million. Outturn figures for 2011-12 will not be available until the annual accounts are finalised. Figures for the remaining years may change as a result of decisions made in future planning rounds and within individual commands.
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many hours of training were required for those flying (a) fast jets, (b) transport aircraft and (c) helicopters in the Royal Air Force in each year since 2008.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
The information on training hours is not held centrally in the format requested.
For flying hours, there is no specific number of hours that a student must fly in order to qualify, rather it is a combination of hours flown and objectives achieved. Some pilots will require more flying hours than others to achieve the required standards.
All pilots complete Elementary Flying Training which requires approximately 55 flying hours per student. Follow-on training varies according to aircraft type and typically involves some 220 hours for fast jets (in two stages), 75 hours for multi-engine aircraft and 75-85 hours for helicopters. Additionally pilots undergo operational conversion training before joining front line units. This varies considerably depending on both the specific aircraft concerned and the pilots’ progress.
Training does not cease after pilots have completed their formal training but continues throughout their flying careers, because all operational flying includes an element of training.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the (a) cost and (b) establishment by numbers is of (i) Land Command, (ii) Navy Command and (iii) Air Command for (A) 2011-12 and (B) 2012-13.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Ministry of Defence expenditure information for financial year 2011-12 is currently subject to audit. The overall cost of staff in future years is reflected in the Departmental Expenditure Limits amounts set out in HM Treasury’s Spending Review 2010 document, CM7942 (pages 57-58).
Staff numbers for the beginning of 2011-12 and 2012-13 are shown in the following table. These include trained and untrained UK regulars, Gurkhas, Full-time Reserve Service personnel and civilians, including Royal Fleet Auxiliary. Significant organisational changes that affect the numbers have taken place during the period concerned.
| Personnel strength | Land command | Navy command | Air command |
| 1 April 2011 | 125,960 | 37,470 | 41,640 |
| 1 April 2012 | 115,960 | 34,890 | 37,740 |
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the average time spent in the rank at which a person enters the (a) Army, (b) Royal Air Force and (c) Royal Navy is before achieving promotion.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The information held is shown in the following table:
| Service | Rank | Time (years) | Remarks |
| Royal Navy | Officer | 2.9 | To attain Sub Lieutenant from Midshipman |
| Other Ranks | 6.8 | To attain Leading Hand (RN), or Lance Corporal (RM) from Rating/Marine | |
| Army | Officer | (1)11 months | To attain 2nd Lieutenant from Officer Cadet |
| Other Ranks | 4.7 | To attain substantive Lance Corporal from Private | |
| Royal Air Force | Officer | 6.85 | To attain substantive Flight Lieutenant from Officer Cadet |
| Non Commissioned Aircrew | 15.25 | To attain substantive Flight Sergeant from Sergeant (entry level). | |
| Ground Trades Other Ranks | 9 | To attain substantive Corporal from Senior Aircraftman | |
| (1 )Army Officers are commissioned upon completion of training at Sandhurst (11 months unless back squadded, for example due to injury). Upon commissioning, they are automatically promoted from Officer Cadet. | |||
The time spent in the rank at which a person enters the armed services, before achieving the first promotion varies greatly. For example, in the RAF, the junior enlisted rank structure has a greater number than the other services, of ranks that must be passed through before competing for the rank of Lance Corporal/Corporal. The table therefore provides the average time for promotion to junior non-commissioned officer in each of the services.
There are many different avenues for entry as a commissioned officer into each of the services. Graduates are commissioned earlier than non-graduates and receive additional seniority based on previously acquired skills leading to many variations in time to promotion. The information on average time should be read in that light.
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim, DUP)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many deployments of UK military personnel have been on the basis of a UN resolution in the last five years; what the cost of those deployments was to date; and what funds the UN contributed financially towards the cost of such deployments.
Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire, Conservative)
Over the last five years, the UK has deployed personnel on numerous United Nations-led missions and as part of international coalitions in support of United Nations Security Council Resolutions. These deployments are shown in the following tables:
| Table 1: Deployments in support of a UN-led mission | |
| Country | Duration over the last five years |
| Afghanistan (UNAMA) | 2008-09 and 2010-11 |
| Cyprus (UNFICYP) | 2007 to present (ongoing) |
| Darfur (UNAMID) | 2008 to 2009-10 |
| Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC/MONUSCO) | 2007 to present (ongoing) |
| Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE) | 2008 only |
| Georgia (UNOMIG) | 2007 to 2009-10 |
| Iraq (UNAMI) | 2007 to 2011 |
| Kenya (UNPOS) | 2007 to present (ongoing) |
| Kosovo (UNMIK) | 2007 to 2008-09 |
| Liberia (UNMIL) | 2007 to 2009-10 |
| Nepal (UNMIN) | 2007 to 2008-09 |
| Sierra Leone (UNIPSIL) | 2007 to 2008-09 |
| Sudan (UNMIS) | March 2007 to 2011 |
| South Sudan (UNMISS) | July 2011 to present (ongoing) |
| Table 2: Deployments in support of a UN Resolution as part of an international coalition | |
| Country/issue | Duration over the last five years |
| Afghanistan | 2007 to present (ongoing) |
| Chad (EUFOR TCHAD/RCA) | 2007 to 2009 |
| Counter Piracy (ATALANTA, CTF 151, Ocean Shield) | 2007 to present (ongoing) |
| Iraq | 2007 to 2009 |
| Kosovo (KFOR) | 2007 to present (ongoing) |
| Libya | 2011 only |
| Somalia in support of AMISOM | May 2012 to present (ongoing) |
It has not been possible to collate the financial cost of each of these missions in each of the last five financial years. The information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
The United Nations provides a partial reimbursement to the UK for its contribution to UN-led missions, this is in accordance with standard UN reimbursement rates. The UN does not provide a reimbursement for coalition operations conducted on the basis of a UN Security Council Resolution. In financial year 2011-12 the UK Government received £1.274 million reimbursement from the UN.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding in each category of expenditure was allocated to the (a) RAF, (b) Royal Navy and (c) Army for recruitment purposes in (i) 2011-12 and (ii) 2012-13.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The information available for expenditure for recruitment purposes is shown in the following table:
| £ million | |||
| Services | |||
| Financial year | Royal Navy | Army | RAF |
| 2011-12 | 2.8 | 7.507 | 6.016 |
| 2012-13 | (1)6.6 | (2)5.281 | 4.853 |
| (1) The figure for 2012-13 contains forecast expenditure of £1.9 million for a campaign which has yet to be submitted to the Efficiency Reform Group for approval. (2) Actual and forecast costs to end September 2012. From 1 October 2012, as a result of the implementation of the Recruiting Partnering Project, marketing will rest with the commercial partner (Capita) who will determine their own marketing strategy to meet the recruiting targets set within the contract. | |||
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) whether his Department considered making members of the Armed Forces who had been prepared, deployed on and recovered from operations with operational allowance earnings exempt from redundancy decisions in tranche 2;
(2) whether he gave consideration to exemption from redundancy in Tranche 2 of the Armed Forces Redundancy Programme to those members of the armed forces who had prepared for, been deployed on and recovered from operations with operational allowance earnings;
(3) whether members of the armed forces who had been prepared for, deployed on and recovered from operations with operational allowance earnings were considered for exemption from redundancy decisions in Tranche 2.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
No. We have repeatedly assured the House that all of those in receipt of operational allowance on the date the redundancy notifications are made are exempt from selection, unless they have applied to be considered for redundancy. Similarly, all those preparing for, or recovering from such an operation are exempt, unless they have volunteered.
Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of the armed forces made redundant in Tranche 2 of the Armed Forces Redundancy Programme
(1) were within (a) one month, (b) two to three months, (c) three to four months, (d) four to five months and (e) five or more months of receiving their pension;
(2) were within (a) one, (b) two to three, (c) three to four, (d) four to five and (e) five or more months of receiving their pension;
(3) were within (a) one, (b) two to three, (c) three to four, (d) four to five and (e) five or more months of receiving a pension.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The proximity of a retirement point is not a consideration when selecting individuals for redundancy. As we reduce the size of the armed forces, our priority is to ensure that they maintain the correct balance of the skills and experience, across the rank structures, which are required to deliver operational capability now and in the future, and it is this which has determined the redundancy fields.
The Ministry of Defence has worked hard to ensure that many more individuals have received an immediate income for which they otherwise would not have qualified. Only 1.2% of individuals who have been selected for redundancy are within one year of qualifying for their immediate pension. These personnel will receive a significantly larger tax free sum, which could total over £100,000, and still get all their accrued pension rights at the age of 60 or 65.
The following table lists the total number of personnel selected for redundancy with an exit date of 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150 or more days earlier than an immediate retirement point:
| Number of days, on discharge, prior to an immediate pension point | Total |
| 30 | 6 |
| 60 | 4 |
| 90 | 9 |
| 120 | 0 |
| 150 or more | 2,624 |
Kevan Jones (North Durham, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) how much the Chief of Defence Staff has spent on (a) his private office and (b) staff costs in the last 12 months, by category of expenditure;
(2) how much the Vice Chief of Defence Staff has spent on (a) his private office and (b) staff costs in the last 12 months, by category of expenditure;
(3) how much the First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff has spent on (a) his private office and (b) staff costs in the last 12 months, by category of expenditure;
(4) how much the Chief of the General Staff has spent on (a) his private office and (b) staff costs in the last 12 months, by category of expenditure;
(5) how much the Chief of the Air Staff has spent on (a) his private office and (b) staff costs in the last 12 months, by category of expenditure.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
Regarding the sizes of private offices, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend Mr Hammond, on 18 January 2012, Hansard, column 825W.
The estimated cost of staff employed in the private offices of the Service Chiefs in financial year (FY) 2011-12 was £2.10 million. This includes costs for the office of the second permanent secretary who shared a private office with the Vice Chief of Defence Staff during the period. This figure does not include costs for some support staff which are provided from other teams.
The costs of household staff supporting Chief of Defence Staff, Vice Chief of Defence Staff and the Service Chiefs are shown in the following table:
£ |
||
| Cost of household staff | ||
| Post | 2010-11 | 2009-10 |
| Chief of the Defence Staff | 67,000 | 128,000 |
| Vice Chief of the Defence Staff | 54,000 | 51,000 |
| First Sea Lord/Chief of the Naval Staff | 97,000 | 161,000 |
| Chief of the General Staff | 67,000 | 161,000 |
| Chief of the Air Staff | 116,000 | 97,000 |
The figures for FY 2011-12 are still being compiled. The figures do not include drivers.
Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) what the planned in-service date for the LABYRINTH communication system was; and when he expects it to be in service;
(2) when the LABYRINTH communication system will reach its contracted functionality;
(3) what penalties are applied through the contract with ATLAS for the late delivery of the LABYRINTH communication system; and whether any such penalty has been incurred to date;
(4) what the original projected cost of the LABYRINTH communication system was; and what the current projected cost is.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The in-Service date for any IT project procured by the Ministry of Defence is the date the customer commences use of live data in support of the business. At contract award for LABYRINTH in January 2009, the planned in-Service date was September 2010. As a result of a number of changes to incorporate additional, but essential, technical capability, the LABYRINTH system was rolled out in the UK in June 2012.
Contracted functionality will be achieved on the successful delivery of incremental capability upgrades that commenced in June 2012. Full contracted functionality is currently planned to be delivered in February 2014.
As is normal for Defence contracts, there are a number of mechanisms and levers available that may be applied when contractual delays occur, the use of which are dependent upon the cause and severity of delay. In this case, the contractor has made appropriate financial redress in accordance with the provisions of the contract.
I am withholding information on costs for the LABYRINTH communication system as its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice commercial interests. However, I can confirm that the project will deliver within approved budgets, and that cost increase since contract award resulting from the need to incorporate essential technical capability additions is less than 9%.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has had discussions with his US counterpart on military action in Iran.
Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
I regularly discuss a range of security issues with my United States counterparts; however the UK continues to work with the US and other countries to achieve a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
I refer the hon. Member to the statement made by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), on 20 February 2012, Hansard, column 654, in which he said that we wish to see a peaceful, negotiated diplomatic settlement to the Iranian nuclear crisis, by which Iran gives the world confidence that it is not developing and will not develop nuclear weapons. All our efforts are devoted towards such a peaceful resolution through a twin track strategy of engagement and pressure, although we are clear that all options for addressing the issue remain on the table.
Thomas Docherty (Dunfermline and West Fife, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the expected in-service date is for the aircraft carrier HMS (a) Queen Elizabeth and (b) Prince of Wales.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
Following the decision to revert to a STOVL design, announced by the Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend Mr Hammond, on 10 May 2012, Hansard, column 140, we are currently reviewing the QEC programme to develop revised programme estimates which will be subject to re-approval by the Ministry of Defence in due course. In the Strategic Defence and Security Review the Government committed to delivering Britain’s future Carrier Strike capability from around 2020, based around the new Queen Elizabeth Class carrier and the new Joint Strike Fighter. We remain fully committed to achieving that.
Maria Eagle (Garston and Halewood, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether (a) Ministers and (b) officials from his Department used the Olympic route network for travel for official purposes during the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport will publish details of Government use of tickets and hospitality in the autumn. This will include use of transport services which operated on the Olympic or Paralympic route networks.
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects the decision to be made on whether to build two new offshore patrol vessels in Portsmouth.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The purchase of new offshore patrol vessels is not currently in the core programme.
Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what effect he expects the replacement of the nuclear deterrent to have on jobs and business.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The Main Gate decision for the Successor programme is not due until 2016. It is therefore too early to assess fully the effect the replacement of the nuclear deterrent will have on jobs and business. Should the Successor programme achieve Main Gate approval, and proceed to production, it will sustain thousands of jobs across the UK submarine industry, including businesses at all levels of the submarine supply chain.
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South, Liberal Democrat)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects the decision to be made on whether to build the new Type 26 Frigates in Portsmouth.
Philip Dunne (Ludlow, Conservative)
The Type 26 Global Combat Ship programme is currently in its assessment phase, with the results of this phase due by the middle of this decade, following which the main investment decision is expected to be made. The build location of the vessels will be confirmed after the main investment decision point.
