| Previous Section | Home Page |
|Number
----------------------
1986-87 |34,049
1987-88 |33,826
1988-89 |33,863
While the services do project recruiting achievement for planning purposes, the figures are necessarily very tentative and it would not be appropriate to make them public.
79. Mr. Colin Shepherd : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people were recruited into the armed services and how many left the armed services during 1988.
Mr. Neubert : During the financial year 1988-89, 33,863 men and women entered the armed forces from civilian life and 39,278 service men and women left the armed forces.
Northern Ireland
41. Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has any plans to introduce changes in the terms and conditions upon which members of the armed services serve in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Neubert : SDE 89 explained that it is the Government's aim to ensure that terms and conditions of service remain relevant to modern conditions. Against this objective, terms and conditions of service, including those relevant to Northern Ireland, are kept under review. However, I am able to offer an assurance that there are no plans to remove the existing waivers of food and accommodation charges which apply in Northern Ireland.
Nuclear Non-proliferation
42. Mr. Ron Brown : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his assessment of the implications for British defence policy of the current extent of countries accepting the principle and practice of nuclear non-proliferation.
49. Mr. Doran : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his assessment of the implications for British defence policy of the current extent of countries accepting the principle and practice of non- proliferation.
58. Mr. Patchett : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his assessment of the implications for British defence policy of the current extent of countries accepting the principle and practice of nuclear non-proliferation.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer).
Column 494
Sea Systems Control Staff
43. Mr. Ian Bruce : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what study has been made of staff savings due to the colocation of sea systems controllerate staff ; and what notional saving in staff has been used to justify the costs of relocating over 1,000 Ministry of Defence personnel.
Mr. Sainsbury : The organisation of the sea systems controllerate has been subject to several recent major studies, including by the Ministry of Defence's manpower auditors, which concluded that significant economies in working efficiency could be achieved by a reorganisation on abovewater and underwater ship systems lines coupled with colocation of the dispersed project staffs. Colocation would lead to efficiency savings from fundamental changes in working practices. These savings are expected to amount to at least 10 per cent. of the manpower requirement of the sea systems controllerate. In the initial investment appraisal of colocation carried out last year, the consequent saving of 460 posts was valued at £8.1 million per annum.
Air Safety
69. Mr. Haynes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the comparability of air safety for United Kingdom forces and those of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation allies.
44. Mr. Darling : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the comparability of air safety for United Kingdom forces and those of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation allies.
75. Mr. Tony Lloyd : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the comparability of air safety for United Kingdom forces and those of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation allies.
Mr. Neubert : The air safety record of United Kingdom forces is broadly comparable with those of other North Atlantic Treaty Organisation forces operating similar equipment.
Nuclear Tests (Compensation)
46. Mr. George Howarth : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has yet been able to assess the implications for his policy on compensation arrangements to United Kingdom ex-service men and their families who were nuclear test victims of the recent decision in the Australian courts.
Mr. Sainsbury : No. The court in Australia has yet to make available the judgment, and consequently we cannot say at present what implications, if any, there might be for British participants in the United Kingdom nuclear test programme.
Surplus Property
48. Mr. Colvin : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his policy on the disposal of Ministry of Defence quarters which are found to be surplus to requirements ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Neubert : It is our policy not to retain quarters for which we have no long-term requirement. Wherever
Column 495
possible surplus properties will be offered for sale, either to service personnel through the services' own discount scheme or on the open market at full market price, if the quarters are not suitable for individual sale through this scheme. Quarters which cannot be sold, for example because of their location, may be reappropriated for other defence purposes or demolished.Nuclear Free-fall Bombs
50. Mr. Cartwright : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about progress on the replacement of the WE177 nuclear bomb.
54. Mr. Menzies Campbell : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a further statement on his policy towards the replacement of the nuclear free-fall bombs.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : We are still studying a number of procurement options for possible replacement of the WE177 free-fall nuclear bomb, but no decisions have yet been taken.
Nuclear Test Bans
51. Mr. Parry : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what would be the implications for United Kingdom nuclear forces of a (a) partial and (b) total nuclear test ban.
55. Mr. Roy Hughes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what would be the implications for United Kingdom nuclear forces of a (a) partial and (b) total nuclear test ban.
61. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what would be the implications for United Kingdom nuclear forces of a (a) partial and (b) total nuclear test ban.
72. Mr. Cox : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what would be the implications for United Kingdom nuclear forces of a (a) partial and (b) total nuclear test ban.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : Since 1963, the United Kingdom has been a party to the partial test ban treaty, which prohibits nuclear tests in all environments except underground. As was made clear in the Statement on the Defence Estimates 1989 (Cm. 675-I, paragraph 217), a comprehensive test ban remains a long-term goal. For the foreseeable future, however, our security will depend on deterrence, based on nuclear weapons. We must, therefore, continue to test our nuclear weapons to ensure that they remain effective and up-to-date.
NATO
52. Mr. Devlin : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he next expects to meet the Supreme Allied Commander Europe to discuss the defence requirements of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in Europe.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My right hon. Friend will meet SACEUR at the meeting of NATO's Nuclear Planning Group in the autumn.
95. Mr. Charles Wardle : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he next expects to meet the secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.
Column 496
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My right hon. Frend will meet Dr. Woerner at the Royal Tournament on 20 July.
66. Mr. Hunter : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he will next have meetings with Defence Ministers of other North Atlantic Treaty Organisation countries ; and what matters will be discussed.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My right hon. Friend will have a number of opportunities for discussion with NATO colleagues over the coming months. The next NATO ministerial meeting will be at the Nuclear Planning Group in the autumn, when Ministers will discuss a range of issues of mutual interest.
Chemical and Biological Weapons
53. Mrs. Fyfe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the United States stockpile of chemical and biological weapons (a) currently and (b) over the next five years.
85. Mr. Wray : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the United States stockpile of chemical and biological weapons (a) currently and (b) over the next five years.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott).
Cancer Clusters
56. Mr. Martyn Jones : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations his Department has had about cancer clusters around nuclear installations for which he is responsible.
71. Dr. Kim Howells : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations his Department has had about cancer clusters around nuclear installations for which he is responsible.
76. Ms. Walley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations his Department has had about cancer clusters around nuclear installations for which he is responsible.
78. Mr. Barron : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations his Department has had about cancer clusters around nuclear installations for which he is responsible.
Mr. Sainsbury : I am not aware of any recent representation to my Department on this matter.
Out-of-area Commitments
62. Mr. Patnick : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of the United Kingdom's defence budget is currently spent on out -of-area commitments.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The estimated cost in 1989-90 of maintaining our overseas commitments in Belize, Cyprus, the Falkland Islands and Hong Kong is £243 million, which represents 1.2 per cent. of the defence budget. This figure includes directly attributable expenditure on capital works and equipment and on running costs for material and manpower. It is not possible to provide directly attributable costs for the Armilla patrol since financial provision is made for the operation of the fleet as a whole.
Column 497
Animal Experiments
Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many animal experiments for warfare testing purposes his Department has been directly responsible for in the last full year for which figures are available.
64. Mr. Harry Barnes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many animal experiments for warfare testing purposes his Department has been directly responsible for in the last full year for which figures are available.
65. Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many animal experiments for warfare testing purposes his Department has been directly responsible for in the last full year for which figures are available.
93. Mr. Hoyle : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many animal experiments for warfare testing purposes his Department has been directly responsible for in the last full year for which figures are available.
Mr. Sainsbury : The Ministry of Defence does not conduct experiments for warfare testing purposes with live animals. Live animals are not used in the development or testing of weapons, but only to develop protective measures against attack and to improve the treatment of injuries. The Ministry of Defence complies fully with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, and the figure recorded under the Act by the Home Office for 1987, the last full year for which figures are available, was 9,200. This represents less than one half of 1 per cent. of all animal experiments conducted in the United Kingdom.
AWACS Offset Agreement
67. Mr. Eastham : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made by his Department in monitoring the number of jobs involved in contracts placed under the AWACS offset agreement.
83. Mr. Bradley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made by his Department in monitoring the number of jobs involved in contracts placed under the AWACS offset agreement.
Mr. Sainsbury : I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Pontefract and Castleford (Mr. Lofthouse).
Dog Training
68. Mr. Latham : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress is being made with his consideration of the report of the consultants into the future of dog training at the Royal Army Veterinary Corps, Melton Mowbray ; and whether he will make a statement.
Mr. Neubert : The Peat Marwick McLintock study into future arrangements for canine and equine-related training in the services has recommended that the Ministry of Defence should vacate and sell the land at Melton Mowbray currently occupied by the RAVC and set up a service animal centre at RAF Syerston, encompassing canine and equine-related training, and allied functions, and using RAF Newton for administrative/domestic support. I am minded to accept the recommendation that a service animal centre should be formed embracing the existing separate service establishments.
Column 498
The choice of site may, however, be affected by a current study into the future of the whole RAF estate including RAF Newton and RAF Syerston. In any event, as a result of the Peat Marwick McLintock study, some land at Melton Mowbray has been identified for disposal, whether or not the service animal centre is established there. We shall be exploring the possibility of the development of the site with the local planning authority. An announcement on the long-term location of the service animal centre will be made as soon as possible.Meanwhile, we are implementing other recommendations made by the consultants concerning the common adoption of best practices, in preparation for the formation of the joint centre. This is expected to save at least £4 million in running costs over the next 10 years. The proposals for the formation of the joint centre are consistent with Government policies on the optimum utilisation of the defence estate, and the introduction of more efficient practices in those areas working in support of the operational capabilities of the armed forces.
Bullying
74. Mr. Ashley : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made with each of the initiatives intended to reduce bullying in the armed forces.
Mr. Neubert : I refer the right hon. Member to the statement I made on 28 June, column 1075. A copy of my letter of 23 June to the hon. Member for Clackmannan (Mr. O'Neill), setting out the progress made in implementing the measures, has been placed in the Library.
European Fighter Aircraft
82. Mr. Dunnachie : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made in respect of the radar system for the European fighter aircraft.
Mr. Sainsbury : I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier today to the hon. Members for Harrow, East (Mr. Dykes) and for Leeds, Central (Mr. Fatchett).
Force Verification
Mr. Battle : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his United States counterpart about the defence implications of inspection and verification of United Kingdom forces, and those of other nations in the event of an early agreement to reduce conventional and nuclear forces.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My right hon. Friend regularly discusses arms control matters, including the defence implications of inspection and verification regimes, with Mr. Cheney and will do so during the course of his current visit to the USA. Helicopters
88. Sir Michael McNair-Wilson : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what low-flying restrictions are imposed on service helicopters.
Mr. Neubert : The general regulations governing the use of the United Kingdom low flying system by fixed-wing aircraft apply also to rotary wing aircraft but with appropriate modifications to take account of their different capabilities.
Column 499
Railgun
90. Mr. Wallace : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will report on the progress of the Railgun project.
Mr. Sainsbury : I refer to the replies that I gave to the hon. Member for Clackmannan (Mr. O'Neil) on 28 June, at column 456 .
Independent European Programme Group
92. Mr. Ian Taylor : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress is being made through the Independent European Programme Group in achieving a more open defence market among North Atlantic Treaty Organisation allies.
Mr. Sainsbury : Significant progress is being made by the Independent European Programme Group towards the creation of an open European defence equipment market, based on measures set out in the action plan approved by Ministers at the Luxembourg meeting in November 1988. At their subsequent meeting in Lisbon on 28 June this year, Ministers reviewed the steps being taken to achieve the key objectives. The central feature of the open market is the dissemination to potential suppliers of information about bidding opportunities. To this end, Governments have now nominated one or more focal points to which companies in other Independent European Programme Group countries can register interest in bidding for defence contracts. Countries have also agreed to publish contracts bulletins by the turn of the year. The bulletins will be similar to those already issued by the United Kingdom and France. This more open market will bring benefits to all participating states. It will also be of considerable value to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation as a whole by enhancing efficient procurement and thereby strengthening the European contribution to the Alliance. With this in mind the Independent European Programme Group will continue to discourage any protectionist tendencies on either side of the Atlantic. Another important initiative which complements the open market is the creation of a European technology plan--to be known as Euclid--which will foster co-operation in research among Independent European Programme Group nations. During its current chairmanship of the Independent European Programme Group, the United Kingdom's aim will be to ensure that the work of the group is taken forward effectively in the best interests of all the allies.
Toxic Waste
Dr. Thomas : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if, pursuant to his reply to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn), Official Report, 19 June, column 60, on toxic waste at Ministry of Defence premises, he will give the reason why it is not the practice to release details of such materials ; and if he will consider revising his policy towards publication in line with the practice adopted by United States military facilities.
Mrs. Wise : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the basis for his policy not to disclose details of radioactive and toxic waste stored or disposed of at Ministry of Defence premises.
Column 500
Mr. Sainsbury : Disclosure of such information could indicate the scale and nature of operations in certain programmes on which detailed revelation would not be in the national interest.
Fuel Containers (Devon)
Mr. Speller : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the circumstances in which two 10ft x 2ft fuel containers were dropped at Stowford Cross in North Devon on Thursday 29 June ; and what steps he is taking to prevent this happening in the future.
Mr. Neubert : The fuel containers in question were jettisoned by a Royal Navy Sea Harrier operating from the Royal Naval air station at Yeovilton, while the aircraft was on an air combat training exercise. The aircraft unintentionally went into a spin and the pilot, following the correct procedures, released the fuel tanks as part of his spin recovery action. The fuel tanks were empty at the time. A local investigation has established that the pilot was not in breach of any regulations.
To minimise the risk to the public, air combat training is carried out over the least populated areas available and always well away from towns and cities. It is also very rare for a Sea Harrier to enter into a spin in this way. The risk therefore of a repetition of this incident or of any consequent injury to persons on the ground is considered to be remote.
Cereal Fields
Mr. Teddy Taylor : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made in the inquiries initiated by Army helicopters based in the south-west in investigating the origin of flattened circular areas of wheat ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Neubert : The Ministry of Defence is not conducting any inquiries into the origins of flattened circular areas of crops. However, we are satisfied that they are not caused by service helicopter activity.
Service Children Education Authority
Mr. Key : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many children currently attend schools run by the service children education authority in (a) north-west Europe, (b) Gibraltar, (c) Hong Kong, (d) Cyprus and (e) elsewhere.
Mr. Neubert : Figures at summer term 1989 :
|Number
----------------------------------
North West Europe |23,880
Gibraltar |679
Hong Kong |1,610
Cyprus |1,655
Elsewhere |163
|-------
Total |27,987
Mr. Key : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many teachers are employed in schools run by the service children education authority.
Mr. Neubert : Figures are for summer term 1989 :
Column 501
|Number
----------------------------------
North West Europe |1,319
Gibraltar |38
Hong Kong |108
Cyprus |122
Elsewhere |11
|-------
Total |1,598
Mr. Key : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the members of the service children education authority.
Mr. Neubert : Controller of the service children education authority (SCEA) is a tri-service rotational appointment currently filled by a Royal Air Force group captain of the administrative branch (education specialisation). There are three deputy controller appointments, currently filled by a Commander RN, a lieutenant colonel RAEC, and a civil servant, senior executive officer. The three deputy controllers are between them responsible for SCEA sections each headed by a major (or service-civilian equivalent), and staffed mainly by civil servants. The total complement of SCEA headquarters is currently 30 personnel.
Mr. Key : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the relationship between the service children education authority and Hampshire county council.
Mr. Neubert : Hampshire local education authority is one of a number of authorities represented on the standing committee for the education of service children (UK), chaired by controller SCEA. SCEA purchases from Hampshire local education authority, among other sources, a range of advisory support services for service children's schools (SCS) overseas. This includes careers guidance, which is provided by local education authority careers officers visiting overseas schools. In addition SCEA buys in Hampshire local education authority advisory time for both primary and secondary schools.
Mr. Key : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether schools run overseas by the service children education authority are subject to inspection by Her Majesty's inspectors operating from the Department of Education and Science ; and whether the inspectors' reports are published.
Mr. Key : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether work experience programmes are available to children in north-west Europe attending schools run by the service children education authority.
Mr. Neubert : Yes. Work experience in north-west Europe is normally organised for 4th-year children (age 14 to 15) in two-week blocks usually during the summer term. Fifteen to 16-year-old children who are following CPVE (Certificate of Pre-Vocational Education) also have a short period of work experience.
IUKADGE Command and Control System
Mr. Rogers : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to publish his assessment of the independent audit of the IUKADGE command and control system.
Column 502
Mr. Sainsbury : No. Both the independent audit of the IUKADGE command and control system and the Ministry of Defence's subsequent assessment of its report will contain information that is both classified and commercially sensitive.
Mr. Rogers : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date were all of the elements of the IUKADGE command and control system originally intended to be in service use, and when the system was first ordered.
Mr. Sainsbury : It is not our practice, nor has it been the practice of previous Governments, to release planned in-service dates of defence equipment.
Mr. Rogers : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the differences between the operational capabilities of the IUKADGE command and control system that is currently on order and the system that it is due to replace.
| Next Section
| Home Page |