| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Hague: The administration of the Benefits Agency medical services is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Bill Etherington, dated 2 February 1995:
The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking for the number of experienced medical practitioners employed by the Benefits Agency's Medical Services (BAMS) in Northumberland and Tyne and Wear. In addition, you require the total budget since 1993 for training courses in Northumberland and Tyne and Wear and a list of all courses for experienced medical practitioners attended since that date. There are ten medical advisers employed by the BAMS in the Northumberland and Tyne and Wear area. In addition, there are approximately one hundred and thirty six medical practitioners who undertake examinations in connection with a variety of benefits on a sessional basis. These medical practitioners are not employed by BAMS, but are paid a sessional fee for the work they undertake. I have provided at Annex A information relating to budget figures for training courses in the Northumberland and Tyne and Wear area as requested.
At Annex B is information relating to the specialist medical training undertaken since January 1993 by the ten medical advisers employed by the BAMS in Northumberland and Tyne and Wear. At Annex C I have provided details of general training courses attended.
I hope you find this reply helpful.
Column 874
Annex A
Budget for BAMS' training courses in the Northumberland and
Tyne and Wear area
|Locally held |Centrally held
|training budget |training budget<1>
|£ |£
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993-94 |1,500 |200,000
1994-95 |1,500 |<2>3,000,000
<1> Of the centrally held training budget, approximately ten per cent. is
spent in the North East, which includes the Northumberland and Tyne and
Wear area.
<2> The increase in the centrally held budget is due to an increase in
training arising from the introduction of Incapacity Benefit.
Annex B
|Number of
|medical
Nature |Duration |advisors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disability equality training |2 days |1
Occupational asthma |2 days |2
Continuing medical education |2 days |7
Chronic bronchitis and emphysema |3 days |9
Training in reading X-rays |1-2 times |9
|weekly for 4
|months
Radiation protection course |1 day |1
GP refresher training |4 days |1
PD D4 symposium |1 day |2
Incapacity Benefit procedures |1 day |10
Incapacity Benefit training |5 days |7
Annex C
|Number of |Number of
|medical |sessional
Nature |Duration |advisers |doctors<1>
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total quality
management |1 day |10 |-
Influencing through
assertiveness |4 days |1 |-
Effective
presentation |4 days |1 |-
Communication
catalyses change |4 days |10 |-
How adults learn |2 days |1 |-
Potentially
aggressive
situations |1 day | 10 |-
Potentially
aggressive
situations |2 hours |- |76
Equal opportunities |1 day |10 |76
Being a manager |2 days |4 |-
Recruitment/selection
interviewing |3 days |3 |-
Stress management |2 days |1 |-
<1> The Potentially Aggressive Situations course and the Equal
Opportunities course were also made available to doctors who
undertake sessional work.
Child Support
Mr. Nigel Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the estimated cost for reprogramming information systems because of changes to the Child Support Act 1991 announced on 23 January; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Burt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.
Column 875
Letter from Miss Ann Chant to Mr. Nigel Jones, dated 2 February 1995:I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the cost of reprogramming information systems following the changes to the Child Support Act 1991 announced on 23 January 1995.
The estimated cost of reprogramming the Child Support Agency's information systems is £0.65 million.
I hope that this is of help.
Absenteeism
Mr. Chidgey: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what were the absenteeism rates for (a) the Child Support Agency, (b) his Department, (c) the Benefits Agency, (d) the Contributions Agency, (e) the Information Technology Services Agency, (f) the Resettlement Agency and (g) the War Pensions Agency in 1994.
Mr. Hague: Information on sickness absence rates for 1994 will not be available until later in the year.
Life-threatening Illnesses
Mr. Nicholas Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his policy on the provision of
Column 876
rights for those suffering from life- threatening illness not already identified in the Disability Discrimination Bill.Mr. Hague: The Bill does not seek to identify specific illnesses but establishes a framework definition of those who would be protected by the proposed rights. This is that a person has a disability if he or she has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his or her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Further details on the interpretation of disability are given in schedule 1 of the Bill.
Income Support
Mr. Bradley: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the estimated cost of restoring income support to unemployed 16 and 17- year-olds.
Mr. Roger Evans: The information is not available.
Severe Hardship Allowance
Mr. Bradley: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what has been the number of (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful claims for the severe hardship allowance in each month since its introduction; and if he will give these figures as a percentage of the total number of claims.
Mr. Roger Evans: The information is set out in the tables.
Column 875
[TITRE} ------------------------------ January |- |- |- |- February |- |- |- |- March |- |- |- |- April |- |- |- |- May |- |- |- |- June |- |- |- |- July |- |- |- |- August |- |- |- |- September |234|69 |107|31 October |311|63 |183|37 November |594|70 |259|30 December |488|69 |224|31
1989
Month |Successful |Per cent. |Unsuccessful|Per cent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January |705 |65 |387 |35
February |760 |59 |518 |41
March |1,012 |65 |554 |35
April |999 |64 |562 |36
May |952 |69 |427 |31
June |1,133 |63 |666 |37
July |1,173 |67 |569 |33
August |1,250 |69 |571 |31
September |1,291 |70 |558 |30
October |795 |65 |410 |35
November |791 |65 |433 |35
December |895 |69 |409 |31
1990
Month |Successful |Per cent. |Unsuccessful|Per cent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January |1,440 |70 |625 |30
February |1,386 |67 |693 |33
March |1,671 |67 |822 |33
April |1,332 |72 |511 |28
May |1,660 |67 |831 |33
June |1,608 |72 |631 |28
July |1,755 |72 |681 |28
August |1,963 |70 |832 |30
September |1,611 |74 |575 |26
October |1,841 |74 |642 |26
November |1,788 |76 |566 |24
December |1,323 |77 |398 |23
1991
Month |Successful |Per cent. |Unsuccessful|Per cent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January |2,540 |75 |838 |25
February |2,711 |75 |912 |25
March |2,799 |76 |899 |24
April |3,277 |77 |973 |23
May |3,589 |79 |941 |21
June |3,490 |82 |761 |18
July |4,478 |81 |1,085 |19
August |4,242 |80 |1,056 |20
September |4,301 |80 |1,107 |20
October |4,613 |80 |1,168 |20
November |4,317 |82 |972 |18
December |3,442 |84 |651 |16
1992
Month |Successful |Per cent. |Unsuccessful|Per cent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January |6,908 |85 |1,228 |15
February |6,187 |83 |1,281 |17
March |6,551 |83 |1,384 |17
April |6,781 |82 |1,440 |18
May |6,627 |82 |1,414 |18
June |7,308 |81 |1,688 |19
July |8,075 |82 |1,771 |18
August |7,702 |83 |1,570 |17
September |7,350 |81 |1,692 |19
October |7,418 |80 |1,838 |20
November |6,783 |78 |1,885 |22
December |5,716 |80 |1,467 |20
1993
Month |Successful |Per cent. |Unsuccessful|Per cent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January |10,797 |85 |1,850 |15
February |9,202 |81 |2,103 |19
March |10,840 |83 |2,145 |17
April |10,759 |86 |1,762 |14
May |10,101 |85 |1,744 |15
June |10,238 |86 |1,695 |14
July |11,298 |88 |1,578 |12
August |10,879 |87 |1,568 |13
September |10,385 |88 |1,484 |12
October |7,841 |87 |1,135 |13
November |9,331 |88 |1,315 |12
December |6,857 |88 |963 |12
1994
Month |Successful |Per cent. |Unsuccessful|Per cent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January |12,348 |89 |1,522 |11
February |11,190 |88 |1,517 |12
March |12,518 |88 |1,636 |12
April |8,892 |87 |1,317 |13
May |10,953 |86 |1,824 |14
June |9,587 |83 |1,896 |17
July |9,731 |81 |2,264 |19
August |9,322 |82 |2,030 |18
September |8,268 |83 |1,726 |17
October |7,149 |82 |1,590 |18
National Insurance Fund
Mr. Denham: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what would be the cost to the national insurance fund of all current holders of an appropriate personal pension with an annual income of (a) £2,000 or below (b) up to £3,000, (c) up to £4,000, (d) up to £5,000, (e) up to £6,000, (f) up to £7,000, (g) up to £8,000, (h) up to £9,000 and (i) up to £10,000 opting back into state earnings- related pensions.
Mr. Arbuthnot [holding answer 25 January 1995]: Information is not available in the form requested. Any
Column 880
estimates of the total cost to the national insurance fund of current holders of appropriate personal pensions opting back into the state earnings-related pension scheme would depend on a large number of unknown factors: these include how long the people concerned would remain contracted in to SERPS, how long they would otherwise have contributed to APP schemes and what their future earnings would be. The table gives illustrative estimates of the cost arising, in selected future years, from contributions paid solely in the single year in which the individuals concerned are assumed to contract into SERPS.Column 879
Extra SERPS expenditure in selected years if APP holder in low earnings bands opt back into SERPS for one year. £ million 1994-95 prices APP holders with |2010-11 |2020-21 |2030-31 |2040-41 |2050-51 earnings under (£per annum) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2,000 |- |- |- |- |- 3,000 |0 |0 |0 |0 |0 4,000 |0 |0 |1 |1 |0 5,000 |0 |1 |2 |2 |1 6,000 |0 |2 |4 |5 |3 7,000 |1 |3 |10 |10 |5 8,000 |1 |5 |15 |15 |10 9,000 |2 |10 |25 |25 |15 10,000 |2 |10 |30 |35 |20 Notes: 1. Little extra cost until 2010 as most APP holders are under age 45. 2. Estimates of numbers affected based on data for 1992-93, the most recently available, used to estimate proportions of APP holders in respect of people in the earnings bands quoted. 3. Earnings under £2,000 would not accrue SERPS so no financial effect in respect of that year. 4. Earnings have been used, as a breakdown by income is not available. 5. The year in which opting back into SERPS is assumed to take place is 1994-95.
FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
Burma
Mr. Alton: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action Her Majesty's Government will take with regard to the recent Burmese military offensive against the Karen people.
Mr. Goodlad: Together with our European Union partners, we intend to express our concern directly to the ruling military regime in Burma about the recent attacks on the headquarters of the Karen ethnic group. We will be pressing for clarification of their commitment to national reconciliation and democratic reform.
Mr. Alton: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures Her Majesty's Government have taken to promote bilateral trade with Burma; and what account is being taken of the Burmese Government's human rights violations.
Mr. Goodlad: We try to ensure that British firms are aware of trade opportunities in Burma not covered by the EU arms embargo, but we offer no financial support to them.
We remain acutely concerned about the continued abuse of human rights in Burma. We and our European Union partners have made it clear to the ruling military regime that normalisation of our relations depends on progress in key areas, including human rights.
Public Funding
Mr. Spearing: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what public funds
Column 880
were made available in the current financial year and what changes are likely for the year 1995 96 for payments to (a) the Westminster Foundation for Democracy and (b) the Council for Education in World Citizenship; and in which countries each organisation operates.Mr. Baldry: (a) The Westminster Foundation for Democracy received a grant in aid of £2.2 million for the current financial year. The foundation will receive £2.5 million for the financial year 1995 96. The foundation exists to promote democratic development worldwide. The majority of its income is spent in central and eastern Europe, former Soviet Union and anglophone Africa.
(b) The Council for Education in World Citizenship is an independent charity operating throughout the United Kingdom, which currently receives funding from the Department for Education, the Scottish Education Department and the Department of Education, Northern Ireland. In 1994 95, the DFE grant amounted to £110,000. In 1995 96, the DFE proposes to provide CEWC with funds totalling £85, 000.
Indonesia
Mrs. Clwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what public representations were made to the Indonesian delegation to the consultative group on Indonesia in July 1994 in respect of the violent suppression of a peaceful demonstration in Jakarta and the suppression of three publications; and if he will explain the phrase in the margins of the July
Column 881
meeting as used in his answer to the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) on 14 July 1994, Official Report, column 752.Mr. Goodlad: None. We raised our concerns about the banning of the three journals in the margins--outside the formal sessions--of the July meeting of the consultative group for Indonesia, in bilateral representations to the Indonesian delegation.
Mrs. Clwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what has been the cost of Britain's diplomatic presence in Indonesia for each year since 1979.
Mr. Goodlad: The total annual costs of Britain's diplomatic presence in Indonesia since the financial year 1983 84 are given. Figures for earlier years are not available.
Year |£ ------------------------------ 1983-84 |1,437,785 1984-85 |1,810,622 1985-86 |1,925,507 1986-87 |1,745,757 1987-88 |1,798,299 1988-89 |1,935,654 1989-90 |2,206,047 1990-91 |2,766,434 1991-92 |3,003,996 1992-93 |3,394,306 1993-94 |3,512,444
Mrs Clwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many diplomatic staff have been stationed in Indonesia in each year since 1979.
Mr. Goodlad: The number of United Kingdom-based staff stationed in Indonesia--at the British embassy, Jakarta--for each year since 1982 are listed. The figures include representatives from other Government Departments and agencies. Figures for earlier years are not available.
Year |Number --------------------- 1982 |30 1983 |30 1984 |30 1985 |31 1986 |31 1987 |30 1988 |31 1989 |33 1990 |33 1991 |33 1992 |33 1993 |33 1994 |32 1995 |30
Mrs. Clwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last raised the question of Indonesia's illegal occupation of East Timor at meetings of the Group of Seven.
Mr. Goodlad: As far as we are aware, the subject has not been addressed at G7 meetings.
Column 882
DEFENCE
Military Training (Colombia)
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many military personnel visited Colombia in 1994 to train military students;
(2) when military personnel were first dispatched to Colombia to assist in the training of military students; and if he will make a statement;
(3) from which regiments military personnel are dispatched to Colombia to train military students.
Mr. Soames: British military personnel have been providing training to the Colombian authorities to help counter the illicit production and trafficking of drugs since 1989. Details of the assistance provided are confidential between the two Governments.
Low Flying
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many reported incidents of low flying there were in each year since 1990.
Mr. Soames: The numbers of inquiries and complaints received by my Department about military low flying in the United Kingdom in each year since 1990 are as follows:
1990: 7,130
1991: 4,846
1992: 6,295
1993: 5,738
1994: 5,778
Ex-service Men's Organisations
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what recent discussions he has had with his colleagues in Government regarding a single ministry for ex-service men's organisations; (2) what discussions he has had with ex-service men's associations regarding a single Ministry to work with ex-service men's associations.
Mr. Soames: My noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence met the Minister of State for Social Security and Disabled People together with representatives of the Royal British Legion and the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mr. Morris) on 23 November 1994.
Nerve Agents
Mr. Livingstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will list the provisions in health and safety laws and regulations from which the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment at Porton Down is exempt, providing an explanation of why the exemption has been allowed in each case;
(2) what research has been carried out on the nerve agent GB at the chemical and biological defence establishment at Porton Down since the closure of the nerve agent plant at Nancekuke; what quantity of the nerve agent GB has been used in this research at Porton Down; with which country the results of the research have been exchanged; and under which defence agreements these results were exchanged;
Column 883
(3) how many service volunteers were involved in studies with the nerve agent pre-treatment set tablets at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down; in which years these studies took place; what was the nature and purpose of these studies; what was the conclusion of the studies; what are the side-effects of NAPS; and under which defence agreement the results of these studies were exchanged with other countries;(4) what was the purpose of research on the nerve agent GE at the nerve agent plant at Nancekuke, Cornwall; what quantities of nerve agent GE were used in this research; with which other countries the results of this research were shared; and under which defence agreements these results were exchanged;
(5) what is the purpose of the contract from the Directorate of Science (Ballistic Missile Defence) which is being carried out at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down; when this contract started; when it will end; and what is its value; (6) how many service volunteers were involved in studies with the S10 respirator at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down; in which years these studies took place; what was the nature and purpose of these studies; what was the conclusion of these studies; and under which defence agreement the results of these studies were exchanged with other countries.
Mr. Soames: These are matters for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive, CBDE, to write to the hon. Member. Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 3 February 1995:
Question 11, Order Paper 26 January 1995
1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking if he will list the provisions in health and safety laws and regulations from which the Chemical and Biological Defence Establish at Porton Down is exempt, providing an explanation of why the exemption has been allowed in each case has been passed to me to reply as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the UK Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them.
3. The Ministry of Defence is bound by the provisions of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 except where the Secretary of State chooses to exercise his powers to exempt the MOD on grounds of National Security. To date the Secretary of State has not exercised this.
4. The Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is a Defence Executive Agency and as such is subject to regulation by the Health and Safety Executive on the same basis as any other MOD establishment. Safety is of paramount importance at CBDE and is a delegated line management responsibility as all members of staff are responsible for their own safety and that of others. Line management carry out six monthly safety inspections and are supported by an independent safety section. These regular inspections are complemented by periodic safety audits carried out by the Safety Services Organisation of the Ministry of Defence and by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 3 February 1995:
Question 14, Order Paper 26 January 1995
1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what research has been carried out on the nerve agent GB at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment at Porton Down since the closure of the nerve agent plant at
Column 884
Nancekuke; what quantity of the nerve agent GB has been used in this research at Porton Down; with which country the results of the research have been exchanged; and under which defence agreements these results were exchanged has been passed to me to reply as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the UK Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measures evaluated.3. Since the closure of the Chemical Defence Establishment at Nancekuke in 1980 research on the nerve agent GB at CBDE Porton Down has covered all aspects concerned with the provision of effective protective measures against the threat that GB might be used by an aggressor against the UK Armed Forces. This has included hazard assessment, detection and identification, physical protection contamination monitoring and management and the use of prophylactic and therapeutic medical countermeasures. Our records that the quantity of GB used in research at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment from 1985 to the present date is about 16 kg. 4. The results of this work were part of the chemical and biological defence programme and would have formed part of the technical database drawn upon in collaboration with our allies under the agreements covering research, development, deployment and standardisation of chemical and biological defence equipment such as those listed by the Rt Hon Archie Hamilton in his reply of 21 May 1992, Official Report, Column 255-256.
Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 3 February 1995:
Question 15, Order Paper 26 January 1995
1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking how many Service volunteers were involved in studies with the nerve agent pre-treatment set tablets at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down; in which years these studies took place; what was the nature and purpose of these studies; what was the conclusion of the studies; what are the side-effects of NAPS; and under which defence agreement the results of these studies were exchanged with other countries has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the UK Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use service volunteers to:
a. assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures,
b. develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
c. evaluate the effects of very low and medically safe concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally.
No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
3. A number of studies using Service volunteers were carried out primarily between 1970 and the early 1980s at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, RMCS Shrivenham, Dover, Bulford, Cambridge Military Hospital as well as some collaborative work with the Institution of Aviation Medicine and more recently in 1993 at the Cambridge Military Hospital. These studies were to evaluate the acceptability of using pyridostigmine bromide and whether such use had adverse side effects or was affected by the nature of the duties of the Service personnel. These studies which lasted for up to eight weeks included the assessment of the effects of NAPS on volunteers undergoing strenuous exercise and of a
Column 885
thermally stressful environment. Our records indicate that a total of about 300 Service volunteers received NAPS during these studies. 4. The short term side effects attributable to the administration of NAPS include; increased frequency of bowel action but rarely overt diarrhoea, nausea and abdominal pain, increased frequency of urination and the worsening of established upper respiratory infection, runny nose and cough.5. These studies concluded that pyridostigmine bromide in NAPS give considerable protection against all organophosphorus nerve agents with no adverse effects and did not interfere with military duties.
Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 3 February 1993:
Question 22, Order Paper 26 January 1995
1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what was the purpose of research on the nerve agent GE at the nerve agent plant at Nancekuke, Cornwall; what quantities of nerve agent GE were used in this research; with which other countries the results of this research were shared; and under which defence agreements these results were exchanged has been passed to me to reply as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the UK Armed Forced have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measures evaluated.
3. My earlier answer to you of 11 January 1994, Official Report, 11 January 1994 (Column 163 4) indicated the approximate periods during which research into nerve agents was carried out at Nancekuke. The majority of the work relating to the nerve agent GE was carried out at the Chemical Defence Research Establishment at Sutton Oak during the late 1940s and early 1950s when GE was studied as part of a systematic approach to the process chemistry of all the nerve agents in the G series. The chemistry of GE is very similar to that of GB and both are dependent upon the intermediate phosphonous dichloride. Although GE is less toxic than GB, it was believed that it was easier to produce. Some studies were devoted to investigating this. Our records indicate that about 700 lbs of GE was produced at Sutton Oak in these studies. Although it was originally envisaged that GE would be produced at Nancekuke in the event interest in GE lapsed and little if any work on GE was carried out at Nancekuke. 4. The results of this work would have formed part of the technical database drawn upon in collaboration with the United States and Canada under the Tripartite Conferences on toxicological warfare.
Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 3 February 1995:
Question 23, Order paper 26 January 1995
1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State asking what is the purpose of the contract from the Directorate of Science (Ballistic Missile Defence) which is being carried out at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down; when this contract started; when it will end; and what is its value has been passed to me to reply as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
2. The Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is pursuing a technology research programme into the defeat of attacks by ballistic missiles with chemical or biological warheads as part of a wider lethality technology research programme which is being funded by the US Government under the terms and conditions of the 1985 US/UK Strategic Defence Initiative Memorandum of Understanding. CBDE's involvement started in May 1992 and is planned to complete later this year, unless a further option of one year, included in the original arrangements, is taken up. The total value of the work due to complete later this year is $9.2M.
Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 2 February 1995:
Column 886
Question 26, Order Paper 26 January 19951. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking how many Service volunteers were involved in studies with the S10 respirator at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down; in which years these studies took place; what was the nature and purpose of these studies; what was the conclusion of these studies and under which defence agreement the results of these studies were exchanged with other countries has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the UK Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use service volunteers to:
a. assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures,
b. develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
c. evaluate the effects of very low and medically safety concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally,
No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
3. Studies took place between August 1984 and February 1985 to gather information on facial and eye to eyepiece dimensions. These took place at various Service units and involved 1,511 Service volunteers. The conclusions led to recommendations for some minor modifications of design and similar small scale studies involving about 30 or 40 volunteers confirmed that the modified design met the requirements.
4. During the same period, laboratory faceseal leakage trials were carried out at CBDE using 249 Service volunteers to measure protection levels as laid down in the NATO Triptych. The test aerosol used in these faceseal leakage trials was sub-micron sodium chloride particles. The trials demonstrated that the respirator performance met the design specification.
5. The S10 respirator is now standard issue to all Service personnel. Consequently all studies at CBDE involving Service volunteers wearing Individual Protective Equipment (IPE) also involve the use of the S10 respirator. Our records are not maintained in a way to readily allow us to identify the number of Service personnel who have worn the S10 respirator and taken part in these studies. Volunteers wearing the S10 respirator have participated in studies to assess the protection given against chemical warfare agents using harmless stimulants such as nebulised corn oil. The S10 respirator has also been worn in studies of the effect of IPE in different climatic conditions to assess the effects on performance of standard military tasks and to assess the physiological load induced by breathing through the respirator under different exercise conditions in order to quantify the degradation in physical performance expected as a result of wearing the respirator.
6. The results of this work were part of the chemical and biological defence programme and would have formed part of the technical database drawn upon in collaboration with our allies under the agreements covering research, development, deployment and standardisation of chemical and biological defence equipment such as those listed by the Rt. Hon. Archie Hamilton in his reply of 21 May 1992, Official Report, Column 255 256.
| Next Section
| Home Page |