| Previous Section | Home Page |
80. Mr. Battle : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he had at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation's (a) nuclear planning group and (b) high level group about United States proposals to enhance their military bases in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The details of nuclear planning group and high level group discussions are confidential.
40. Mr. Bernie Grant : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the implications for burden-sharing arrangements of the proposed increase in the financial commitment of the United States to its bases in the United Kingdom.
74. Mr. Clay : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the implications for burden-sharing arrangements of the proposed increase in the financial commitment of the United States to its bases in the United Kingdom.
102. Mrs. Mahon : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the implications for burden-sharing arrangements of the proposed increase in the financial commitment of the United States to their bases in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Heffer : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the implications for burden-sharing arrangements of the proposed increase in the financial commitment of the United States to their bases in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The United States presence in the United Kingdom is an important contribution to the sharing of risks, roles and responsibilities within the Alliance. Details of United States spending plans are, of course, a matter for the United States Government.
Column 655
56. Mr. Harry Barnes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the United States Defence Department about its plans to build new storage vaults for nuclear bombs at a number of its military bases in the United Kingdom.
69. Mr. Galloway : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the United States Defence Department about its plans to build new storage vaults for nuclear bombs at a number of its military bases in the United Kingdom.
86. Mr. Patchett : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what discussions he has had with the United States Defence Department about its plans to build new storage vaults for nuclear bombs at a number of its military bases in the United Kingdom.
121. Mr. Eastham : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the United States Defence Department about its plans to build new storage vaults for nuclear bombs at a number of its military bases in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My Department is involved in continuing discussions with the United States Government on this matter.
Nuclear-Powered Vessels
18. Ms. Walley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a study of possible radioactive contamination at Holy Loch, Faslane and Rosyth caused by nuclear-powered defence vessels.
20. Dr. Godman : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a study of possible radioactive contamination at Holy Loch, Faslane, Rosyth and the Firth of Clyde caused by nuclear-powered defence vessels.
24. Mr. Madden : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a study of possible radioactive contamination at Holy Loch, Faslane and Rosyth caused by nuclear-powered defence vessels.
30. Mr. Worthington : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a study of possible radioactive contamination at Holy Loch, Faslane, Rosyth and the Firth of Clyde caused by
nuclear-powered defence vessels.
Mr. Younger : No. Thorough monitoring of radioactivity in environmental materials and gamma dose rates in air at Holy Loch, Faslane and Rosyth is carried out by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The results show that public radiation exposure in these areas is consistently less than 0.1 per cent. of the limit recommended by the international commission on radiological protection. This is equivalent to the radiation which would be received during a return flight in the Glasgow shuttle. The Ministry of Defence carries out its own monitoring of these sites, and the results are consistent with those produced by MAFF.
Single Market
19. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the defence procurement implications of the implementation of the single European market.
Column 656
88. Mr. Buckley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the defence procurement implications of the implementation of the single European market.
Mr. Sainsbury : The implementation of the single European market does not directly affect the managment of defence procurement. The implementation will, however, have an important impact on many of our suppliers, as they operate in both the civil and defence sectors of the economy.
Women (Front-line Units)
21. Mr. Burns : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he intends deploying women in front-line units of the three services.
142. Mr. Bill Walker : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he intends deploying women in front-line units of the three services.
Mr. Neubert : All three services are examining ways of increasing the range of employment opportunities for women. It remains our policy that women should not be employed in direct combat roles, though they may bear arms for self-defence and the defence of certain establishments.
Defence Establishments (Explosions and Fires)
22. Mr. Darling : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on recent explosions and fires at defence establishments.
136. Mr. McCartney : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on recent explosions and fires at defence establishments.
141. Mrs. Wise : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on recent explosions and fires at defence establishments.
Mr. Sainsbury : The 1988 figures for the defence establishments, as distinct from service establishments, are 80 fires requiring fire-fighting action and two explosions. These incidents resulted in four minor casualties, and the aggregate damages are assessed to be less than £40,000.
Trident
23. Mr. Butler : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January, Official Report, column 133, he will indicate the major areas of cost reduction in the Trident programme.
63. Mr. Franks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January, Official Report, column 133, he will indicate the major areas of cost reduction in the Trident programme.
85. Miss Emma Nicholson : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January, Official Report, column 133, he will detail the sources of the cost savings in the Trident programme.
126. Mr. Evennett : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for
Column 657
Winchester (Mr. Browne) of 17 January, Official Report, column 133, he will detail those areas in which there has been a real reduction in costs in the Trident programme.Mr. Younger : The £104 million real reduction in the Trident estimate since my announcement in January 1988 has arisen largely in the missile area, where there has been a reduction of about £100 million. In addition, there have been other smaller reductions of £8 million in the submarine area, and some £24 million in the equipment area. These reductions have been offset by the net effect of smaller changes in other areas of the programme.
45. Mr. Maples : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has assessed the value for money received through the purchase of Trident ; and if he will make a statement.
127. Mr. Hunter : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a further statement on the progress of the Trident programme.
Mr. Younger : I refer my hon. Friend to the answer that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) on 17 January at column 133 and to the detailed report on Trident which I placed in the Library of the House at the same time. These show that Trident remains outstanding value for money in providing effective deterrence.
48. Mr. David Shaw : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the extent to which Trident will provide the United Kingdom with a credible strategic nuclear deterrent into the 21st century.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The Government's decision to replace Polaris with Trident was based on a full assessment of what was needed to maintain the effectiveness and credibility of Britain's independent strategic nuclear deterrent into the next century.
73. Mr. Ron Brown : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has received recent representations from the Amalgamated Engineering Union about the cost of Trident ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : No. Trident remains outstanding value for money in providing effective deterrence for this country.
European Fighter Aircraft (Radar)
26. Mr. Tony Lloyd : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the latest procurement plans for the EFA radar system.
43. Mr. Morley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the latest procurement plans for the EFA radar system.
71. Mr. Ray Powell : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the latest procurement plans for the EFA radar system.
Mr. Sainsbury : A report by the prime contractor is currently under consideration by NEFMA, the international management agency for the EFA programme, and by the collaborating nations. I would hope a decision on the winning consortium could be made early this year.
143. Mr. Strang : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has had discussions with any of his
Column 658
counterparts in the Governments funding the European fighter aircraft on the criteria which should be taken into account in reaching a decision on which consortium should be awarded the nose radar contract ; and if he will make a statement on the prospects for an early decision.Mr. Sainsbury : My right hon. Friend often discusses with his counterparts the current position on a wide range of projects, including EFA. In respect of the second part of his question I refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Mansfield (Mr. Meale).
Chemical Weapons
27. Mr. Hind : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the readiness of British forces to repel attack by chemical weapons.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The United Kingdom abandoned its offensive chemical warfare capability in the late 1950s but maintains an appropriate mix of adequate and effective nuclear and conventional forces to deter or repel any form of attack. We also carry out extensive research at the chemical defence establishment, Porton Down, into defensive measures to protect our armed forces against an attack using chemical weapons. This includes the detection of chemical agents, the protection of personnel, and medical counter-measures. Our armed forces are trained and equipped accordingly.
96. Mr. Neil Hamilton : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Government intend responding to the Soviet announcement of a unilateral cut in chemical weapons.
120. Mr. David Porter : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether Her Majesty's Government intends responding to the Soviet announcement of a unilateral cut in chemical weapons.
134. Mr. Norris : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Government intend responding to the Soviet announcement of a unilateral cut in chemical weapons.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : We welcome the announcement by Mr. Shevardnadze that the Soviet Union intends to begin destroying some of its chemical weapons stocks, but no details have been given of the rate of destruction or the quantity and type of weapons to be destroyed. There is a long way to go before Soviet stocks, which are the largest in the world, are brought down to the level of the West's. The United Kingdom abandoned its offensive chemical warfare capability in the late 1950s and the United States observed a unilateral moratorium on the production of chemical weapons from 1969 to 1987, although the Soviet Union continued production. The United States has already begun a destruction programme of their unitary chemical weapon stocks.
29. Mr. Alan W. Williams : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent bilateral discussions he has had with his United States counterpart about chemical weapons production.
32. Mr. Boyes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent bilateral discussions he has had with his United States counterpart about chemical weapons production.
Column 659
66. Mr. Terry Lewis : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent bilateral discussions he has had with his United States counterpart about chemical weapons production.
129. Mrs. Clwyd : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent bilateral discussions he has had with his United States counterpart about chemical weapons production.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My right hon. Friend has regular discussions with his United States counterpart on a wide range of defence issues.
130. Mr. Flynn : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether stocks of United States forces nerve gas or other chemical or biological weapons are advanced-based in Britain or in any other NATO country.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : There are no such stocks in Britain. However, United States forces in Germany hold stocks of chemical weapons.
NATO Nuclear Planning Group
28. Mr. Boswell : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when next he intends attending NATO's nuclear planning group.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The next meeting of the NATO nuclear planning group is due to take place in the spring in Brussels.
Redundant Land and Buildings
33. Mr. Robert B. Jones : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy on the sale of redundant land and buildings to assist in the financing of the equipment budget.
Mr. Neubert : It is the Department's policy to keep the size of its estate under constant review and to dispose of surpluses as quickly as possible so that holdings are the minimum required for defence purposes. The resources released as a consequence are available for other high priority defence requirements.
TGWU (General Secretary)
34. Mr. Robert G. Hughes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has received a request from the general secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union for a briefing on defence matters prior to his visit to the Soviet Union.
123. Mr. David Evans : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has received a request from the general secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union for a briefing on defence matters prior to his visit to the Soviet Union.
Disarmament
35. Dr. Reid : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's response to the detailed conventional forces reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other eastern European Governments.
Column 660
38. Mr. McTaggart : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's response to the detailed conventional force reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other eastern European Governments.
79. Mr. Ron Davies : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his North Atlantic Treaty Organisation counterparts about a NATO response to the detailed conventional force reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other Eastern European Governments.
97. Mr. Ian Taylor : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions are taking place to determine NATO's response to Soviet troop withdrawals from Eastern Europe ; and if he will make a statement.
113. Mrs. Fyfe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his North Atlantic Treaty Organisation counterparts about a North Atlantic Treaty Organisation response to the detailed conventional forces reduction announced by the Soviet Union and other Eastern European Governments.
117. Mr George Howarth : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his NATO counterparts about a NATO response to the detailed conventional forces reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other Eastern European Governments.
119. Ms. Ruddock : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's response to the detailed conventional forces reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other Eastern European Governments.
124. Ms. Mowlam To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's response to the detailed conventional forces reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other Eastern European Governments.
135. Mr. Barron : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his NATO counterparts about a NATO response to the detailed conventional forces reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other Eastern European Governments.
144. Mr. Blunkett : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what response to the Soviet bloc troop reduction initiative he will be advocating to Britain's NATO partners.
Mr. Archie Hamilton The countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation have welcomed the reductions announced by the Soviet Union and other Warsaw pact countries as a significant step towards the elimination of the Warsaw pact's superiorities in conventional forces in Europe. But even if the announced reductions are implemented, the Warsaw pact will continue to enjoy significant numerical superiorities in key equipments such as tanks and artillery. NATO will therefore continue with its existing policy of deterrence whilst seeking balance in conventional forces in Europe at the new conventional arms control negotiations which are scheduled to begin in Vienna in March this year.
115. Mr. Carrington : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will make a further statement on the
Column 661
extent to which, following the withdrawals from eastern Europe of Soviet tanks and manpower as announced by Mr. Gorbachev, the Warsaw pact will have achieved a balance with NATO.Mr. Archie Hamilton : If implemented, the reductions announced by Mr. Gorbachev in December 1988, and elaborated in January 1989, would leave the Warsaw pact with an advantage over NATO in tanks and artillery of some 2.5 : 1. NATO countries are still analysing the recent announcements of reductions in the forces of other Warsaw pact countries. It is clear, however, that significant imbalances would remain even if these reductions were also implemented.
Low Flying
36. Mr. Bradley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received from (i) German citizens and (ii) the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany seeking a reduction of low flying in Germany.
112. Mr. Martlew : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received from (a) German citizens and (b) the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany seeking a reduction of low flying in Germany.
Mr. Neubert : My right hon. Friend has not received any such representations from citizens of the Federal Republic of Germany, but last week he had discussions with his German colleague, Dr. Scholz, about a wide range of issues of mutual interest, including ways in which it might be possible to ease the impact of low flying training on German citizens.
58. Mr. Home Robertson : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make arrangements for independent monitoring of low-level military flying exercises to enforce regulations concerning maximum speeds and minimum heights.
70. Mr. Amos : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the expected number of low-flying exercises over Northumberland in the next 12 months.
Mr. Neubert : Whilst detailed planning has not yetbeen finalised, low-flying exercises activity over Northumberland this year is expected to be no greater than in recent years. I shall of course continue to give hon. Members advance notification of any significant low-flying activity which may affect their constituents. 89. Mr. Irvine : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the extent of low-flying training available to the RAF in West Germany is sufficient ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Neubert : The present level of low-flying training available to the Royal Air Force in the Federal Republic of Germany, together with that undertaken by Royal Air Force (Germany) aircrew in the United Kingdom and elsewhere is assessed to be sufficient to enable them to carry out their essential operational training and other tasks.
Column 662
99. Mr. Dunnachie : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to reduce the amount of low-flying in Scotland.
131. Mr. McAllion : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to reduce the amount of low flying in Scotland.
Mr. Tredinnick : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many low-flying military aircraft passed within one mile of East Shilton and Hinckley, Leicestershire, each month between 1 January 1988 and 31 January 1989.
Mr. Neubert : The information requested is not available and could not be provided without disproportionate effort and cost.
| Next Section
| Home Page |