| Previous Section | Home Page |
Column 1179
|Direct |Indirect |Total
|Value of exports|employment |employment |employment
|£ million
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1987-88 |2,000 |44,000 |38,500 |82,500
1988-89 |2,000 |42,500 |37,500 |80,000
1989-90 |3,000 |50,000 |44,000 |94,000
1990-91 |2,500 |37,500 |33,000 |70,000
1991-92 |3,000 |42,000 |37,000 |79,000
1992-93 |2,000 |28,000 |24,500 |52,500
Note:
As with table 1.10 of "UK Defence Statistics 1994", all figures are rounded to the nearest 500-total
figures may not therefore correspond to the sum of the components.
Satellite Intelligence Data
Satellite Intelligence Data
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether intelligence data gathered from satellites of the United Kingdom and its allies is fully available to United Kingdom forces serving with UNPROFOR; and what limitations on such exchanges of data exist.
Mr. Soames: All necessary information, derived from a variety of sources, is provided to UK forces serving with UNPROFOR.
Cruise Missiles
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to ask for contracts for a conventionally armed stand-off missile system and to acquire cruise missile systems for United Kingdom forces.
Mr. Freeman: I refer to the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Milton Keynes,
Column 1180
North-East (Mr. Butler) on 29 November 1994, Official Report , column 621 .Feasibility studies are now under way into the possibility of fitting our submarines with conventionally armed Tomahawk land missiles; results from these studies are expected in the spring and a decision on procurement will be taken in the light of those findings.
Global Monitoring System
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what rights of access to the global monitoring system the United Kingdom possesses; and if he will list the agreements that govern them.
Mr. Soames: I am not aware of any such system.
Bombing (Bihac)
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 1 December, Official
Column 1181
Report , columns 913-14, concerning the dropping of napalm bombs, whether the United Nations military observers identified the maker of the unexploded bomb.Mr. Soames: From markings found on the unexploded bomb, the weapon has been identified as having been manufactured in the former Yugoslav Republic.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 1 December, Official Report , columns 913-14, concerning the dropping of napalm bombs, what was the nationality of the UN military observer who reported the incident and that of the UNMOs who collected evidence at the impact points; and what was the evidence which they collected.
Mr. Soames: It is not UN policy to release information on the nationalities of individual UN military observers involved in incidents. A cluster bomb casing, an unexploded bomb, unexploded and exploded bomblets and unburnt weapon material were found at the site.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many cluster bombs were dropped on Bihac; what was the estimated weight of explosive used in all bombs falling on Bihac; and what assessment he has made of their country of manufacture.
Mr. Soames: Two cluster bombs were dropped in Bihac on 18 November. Each bomb had an estimated weight of explosive of 32 kg. It is assessed that the cluster bombs were British manufactured BL755 munitions, which were purchased by the former Yugoslavia prior to the outbreak of the present conflict.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 2 December, Official Report , columns 945-46 , what assessment he has made of the factors underlying the absence of photographic evidence in relation to the bombing in Bihac; and what assessment he has made of casualties or damage to buildings in the Bihac area.
Mr. Soames: The decision as to whether or not to gather photographic evidence in relation to the bombing in Bihac rested with the UN. We have no information as to the casualties caused by the air attacks on 18 November. We are only aware of some minor damage to an old warehouse and to a football field.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 1 December, Official Report , column 913 , whether the loss of one of the two aircraft observed in the vicinity of Bihac was reported at the time; if the aircraft was totally destroyed with its pilot; and why the United Nations military observers did not photograph the wreckage for identification purposes.
Mr. Soames: The loss of one of the aircraft observed in the vicinity of Bihac was reported at the time the aircraft was destroyed and the pilot killed. The decision not to photograph the wreckage rested with the UN.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 2 December, Official Report, columns 945-46 , what were the initial reports of the damage inflicted by the bombing of Bihac; and if these were consistent with the dropping of an unexploded napalm bomb and an unspecified number of cluster bombs.
Mr. Soames: Initial reports of the bombing of Bihac on 18 November indicate that the munitions used in the attack caused only minor damage to an old warehouse and to a football field. Although some sub-munitions of the
Column 1182
cluster bombs exploded, available evidence suggests that neither of the two weapon types operated as designed.Absenteeism
Mr. Chidgey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what was the absenteeism rate for the Defence Analytical Services Agency in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(2) what was the absenteeism rate for the Naval Aircraft Repair Organisation in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(3) what was the absenteeism rate for his Department in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(4) what was the absenteeism rate for the Defence Research Agency in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(5) what was the absenteeism rate for the Defence Operational Analysis Centre in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(6) what was the absenteeism rate for the RAF Training Group Defence Agency in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(7) what was the absenteeism rate for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(8) what was the absenteeism rate for the Meteorological Office in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(9) what was the absenteeism rate for the defence animal centre in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(10) what was the absenteeism, rate for the RAF Support Command's Maintenance Group Defence Agency in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(11) what was the absenteeism rate for the Army Base Repair Organisation in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(12) what was the absenteeism rate for the Hydrographic Office in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(13) what was the absenteeism rate for the defence postal and courier services in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(14) what was the absenteeism rate for the Defence Accounts Agency in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
(15) what was the absenteeism rate for the Military Survey in 1991, 1992 and 1993;
Mr. Freeman: Neither my Department nor its agencies could provide the information requested without disproportionate cost and effort.
Special Advisers
Mr. Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Darlington (Mr. Milburn) of 1 December, Official Report, columns 903 94, if he will make a statement regarding his Department's expenditure on special advisers in each of the last three financial years and for the financial year 1979 80.
Mr. Freeman: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary on 19 December 1994, Official Report, column 937 .
Nuclear Submarines
Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what responsibilities have been vested in (a) Devonport Management Ltd. and (b) Babcock Thorn for the longer-term management of laid-up nuclear powered submarines; for how long it is intended that laid-up nuclear submarine boats will be stored afloat; what has been the cost to date for the preparation of each boat in
Column 1183
an environmentally fit state for storage afloat; and which body is responsible for submitting and maintaining the nuclear safety case for such nuclear submarines withdrawn from operational service; (2) whether environmental and safety cases for the storage afloat of nuclear submarines withdrawn from operational service have been submitted for approval to the nuclear installations inspectorate.Mr. Freeman: Responsibility for decommissioned nuclear-powered submarines rests with my Department; contracts are placed with the dockyard contractors when necessary in relation to the maintenance of the submarines. Storage afloat of decommissioned nuclear submarines is an interim policy pending national decisions on a final disposal route, the timing of which is still under consideration. The approximate costs of undertaking the defuelling, de-equipping and lay-up preparation process for those nuclear-powered submarines which have been taken out of service to date are as follows:
|DDLP
Submarine |£ million
---------------------------------------
HMS Swiftsure |11.5
HMS Warspite |11.3
HMS Churchill |11.2
HMS Conqueror |10.6
HMS Courageous |10.8
HMS Revenge (SSBN) |18.7
HMS Valiant and HMS Resolution have
not started their DDLP process yet.
Those costs do not include the costs of final disposal, the policy for which is still under consideration. It is also not possible to provide costs on the decommissioning of HMS Dreadnought, which was the first nuclear submarine to be withdrawn from service in 1982 and the information requested, insofar as it may be available, could be assembled only at disproportionate cost.
Since section 1 (1) (a) of the Nuclear Installations Act 1965 specifically excludes nuclear reactors comprised in a means of transport from the provisions of the Act, there is no requirement to prepare environmental or safety cases to the NII. However, hazard analysis has been conducted at each dockyard, and the MOD and the relevant local authorities carry out regular surveys alongside, which confirm that the storage afloat of the decommissioned submarines presents no external radiological hazard.
Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will give the number of vessels from the Royal Navy's surface fleet that spent a substantial part of their operational time in guarding nuclear submarines.
Mr. Soames: It is not my Department's policy to comment on operational matters.
Departmental Telephones
Mr. Donohoe: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much has been spent on telephone charges and how many telephone calls have been made by his Department for each of the last five years.
Mr. Freeman: For telephone costs I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 13 December, Official Report, column 576 , to the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark).
Column 1184
The number of telephone calls made by my Department is not recorded, and could not be obtained without disproportionate cost.Defence Export Services Organisation
Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many staff have been employed in the office of the Defence Export Services Organisation in Jakarta in each year since its establishment; and what is the breakdown of their posts.
Mr. Freeman: Three staff have been employed in the Jakarta office each year since its establishment. The breakdown is as follows: one grade 7, one personal secretary--shared with the British defence attache Jakarta- -and one driver.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on which date the decision to establish an office of the Defence Export Services Organisation in Jakarta was taken.
Mr. Freeman: The decision to establish an office of the Defence Export Services Organisation in Jakarta was taken in September 1990.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on which date in 1991 an office of the Defence Export Services Organisation was formally established in Jakarta.
Mr. Freeman: The office for the Defence Export Services Organisation was formally established in Jakarta in April 1991.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the annual cost of running the office of the Defence Export Services Organisation in Jakarta in each year since its establishment both in full and net of any offsetting administrative arrangements.
Mr. Freeman: The estimated annual cost of running the DESO office in Jakarta in each year since its establishment has been:
1991-92 |1992-93|1993-94|1994-95 £K |£K |£K |£K ---------------------------------------- 126<1> |67 |78 |<1>167 <1> including three years advance rent.
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the country-based project groups were set up within the defence export services teams; when each country-based project group was functioning; and how many such country-based project groups exist at the present time.
Mr. Freeman: Within the Defence Export Services Organisation there are three country-based project teams: for Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Kuwait. They were established in September 1985, November 1989 and January 1993 respectively.
Hercules
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what contribution he proposes to make towards the tendering costs of the proposals for refurbishment or replacement of the Hercules aircraft.
Dr. David Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations were made to him following
Column 1185
the placement of an advertisement for the sale of Hercules C130K by his Department in the September 1994 edition of Flight International .Mr. Freeman: Following placement of the advertisement, 20 organisations expressed a possible interest in Hercules C130K aircraft. Contact will be made with these organisations should aircraft become available for sale.
Dr. David Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will now withdraw the offer to put up for sale a number of Hercules C130K aircraft which were advertised in the September 1994 edition of Flight International; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Freeman: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 28 November, Official Report, column 550 .
Mr. French: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what conclusions he has reached about the Hercules replacement programme; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Freeman: I refer the hon. Member to the answer which my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence gave on 16 December, Official Report column 823.
Biological Warfare (Vaccines)
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 21 November to the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark), Official Report, column 59, if he will list the countries, other than the United Kingdom, in which licences for civilian use had been obtained for vaccines for biological warfare protection.
Mr. Soames: Of the vaccines administered to British service personnel during Operation Granby, against the potential biological warfare threat, two were not licensed in the UK for civilian use. One was licensed in United States of America and Canada, while the other was licensed in France, Ivory Coast, Senegal and Venezuela. Both vaccines are, however, tested by the UK National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, and cleared for use by the institute and the Department of Health.
Ministerial Train Journeys
Mr. MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many train journeys of one hour's duration or more he has made in Britain in 1994 in the course of his official duties.
Mr. Freeman: My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has made two train journeys of one hour's duration or more in Britain in 1994 in the course of his official duties.
Low Flying
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the pilots of the two Harrier jets that flew at a low altitude over the Royal Welsh agricultural show 1994 filed and submitted flight plans indicating their intentions; if flight plans were authorised; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Soames: There were no breaches of the avoidance afforded to the Royal Welsh agricultural show in 1994. The incidents to which the hon. Member refers occurred, in fact, in 1993. At one of the units concerned, a flaw occurred in the system for presenting details of temporary
Column 1186
avoidances to aircrew; as a result, the avoidance was not taken into account in planning the sortie. In the second case, the sortie was planned to avoid the area of the show, but adverse weather conditions necessitated a diversion for flight safety reasons from the planned route, in the course of which the breach occurred.Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many breached of low flying regulations there were over Wales in 1992, 1993 and so far in 1994; how many of these breaches resulted in formal disciplinary procedures; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Soames: There were eight confirmed breaches in 1992 and four in 1993. Investigations to date in 1994 have confirmed that 11 breaches have occurred. None of these has to date resulted in court martial or summary disposal proceedings under the service discipline Acts. However, copies of the RAF police reports into the incidents have been sent to the commanding officers of the aircrew concerned for consideration as what further action is necessary and what can be learned from the incident.
Sir David Steel: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy while low flying training is still necessary to offer low-level flights in conventional aircraft, as distinct from high- speed jets, to educate the public in the necessity of such manoeuvres.
Mr. Soames: No. We believe the provision of such flights would be of no practical benefit and the cost could not be justified. My Department does, however, recognise the importance of explaining the need for low flying and how it is controlled and monitored. Accordingly, public presentations are given regularly by RAF representatives and officials around the UK. Furthermore, informative leaflets are freely available. We believe this better meets this requirement.
Mr. Foulkes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations he has received concerning infringements of low flying regulations.
Mr. Soames: My Department has recently received a number of representations from hon. Members and the general public about alleged infringements of low flying regulations.
Mr. Foulkes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date the recent alteration of the boundaries of the Glasgow-Prestwick low-flying avoidance area took effect; what is now the minimum permitted altitude for military low flying over and in the vicinity of (a) the Heads of Ayr holiday camp, (b) Maybole, (c) Dalrymple, (d) Patna, (e) Drongan, (f) Ochiltree, (g) Cumnock, (h) Auchinleck, (i) Catrine, (j) Mauchline and (k) Ballochmyle hospital; and what consultations took place prior to the reduction of the size of the Glasgow-Prestwick avoidance area.
Mr. Soames [holding answer 16 December]: The alteration took effect on 7 November 1994 to coincide with the issue of revised military flying charts. The locations listed, with the exception of Mauchline which straddles the boundary, are outside the revised avoidance area and therefore open to low flying by fixed-wing aircraft to a minimum altitude of 250 ft minimum separation distance. The guidance provided to aircrews does, however, state that they should avoid flying over populated areas wherever possible. The UK low flying system alters whenever there is a reduction or increase of controlled airspace of this kind, whether civil or military, and it is not our practice to conduct consultations when these changes are made.
Column 1187
Porton Down
Mr. Livingstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if service volunteers who take part in tests at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment at Porton Down are bound by the Official Secrets Acts in respect of the tests.
Mr. Soames: Although service volunteers are bound by the Official Secrets Acts in the same way as all other Government employees, their medical records are provided on request to their general practitioner, as is information on the studies in which they participated.
Nuclear Liabilities
Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the answer of the President of the Board of Trade of 9 December, Official Report , column 389 , if he will estimate the total liabilities to British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. and the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority in respect of pre-1971 programmes; what have been the total payments made so far as a result of these liabilities; and what further payments are planned within the next public expenditure plan period.
Mr. Freeman: Since 1988 to the end of the financial year 1993 94 the Department has paid £365 million in respect of these payments. An estimate of the payment for this financial year is some £50 million. The payments estimated for the next public plan period amount to about £250 million over the next three years.
The estimated total value of pre-1971 waste management and decommissioning liabilities to BNFL and AEA extending well into the next century is in the order of £2 billion.
Cyprus
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the name of the officer commanding British forces in Cyprus; when he was appointed to this position; and when his appointment is expected to end.
Mr. Soames: The officer commanding British Forces in Cyprus is Major General A. G. H. Harley, CB OBE. He was appointed to this position on 25 March 1993 and his appointment is expected to end in February March 1995.
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the Commander in Chief of British forces in Cyprus on the need to make clear to service personnel the serious nature of drink-related driving offences; what assessment he has made of the prevalence of the offence; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Soames: My noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence will write to the hon. Member.
Goose Bay
Mr. McFall: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the planned number of low-level sorties to be flown by Royal Air Force aircraft from Canadian forces Goose Bay in each of the years (a) 1992, (b) 1993 and (c) 1994; and what were the reasons for any divergence between the planned number of sorties and the actual numbers of sorties flown in each year.
Mr. Soames: In 1994, it was planned to fly 1,212 sorties, the vast majority of which would have involved an element of low flying. In the event, 1,299 sorties were
Column 1188
actually flown. Records of the number of sorties planned to be flown in 1992 and 1993 are not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Any divergence between the number of sorties planned and those readily actually flown could be the result of a variety of factors including; aircraft availability and weather but chiefly the effect of unforeseen operational deployments.Mr. McFall: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many weapons, and of what types, were dropped or fired by Royal Air Force aircraft during training from Canadian forces base Goose Bay in the 1994 flying season.
Mr. Soames: Some 290 inert 1,000 lb bombs and 297 inert 28 lb practice bombs were dropped by RAF aircraft during training from Canadian forces base Goose Bay in the 1994 flying season. No weapons were "fired" by RAF aircraft.
| Next Section
| Home Page |