| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Kaymar Telephone Numbers
Mr. Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what inquiries he has received about the Kaymar telephone numbers; and if he will place the substantive replies from his Department in the Library. [25342]
Mr. Soames: My Department has recently been asked about a certain telephone number which the inquirer suggested may have been associated with a photographic studio known as Kaymar Studios. It appears that this inquiry is related to a pending appeal against a conviction for a criminal offence, evidence relating to which should be handled by the relevant solicitors. Such information as is available to my Department has therefore been passed to the Crown Prosecution Service.
Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston
Mr. Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the expenditure by his Department in each of the last 10 years on studies on the decommissioning of facilities at AWE Aldermaston. [25396]
18 Apr 1996 : Column: 584
Mr. Arbuthnot : Individual studies are not conducted; decommissioning planning follows standard procedures designed to ensure the safe and complete implementation of the process. Such planning costs are not required to be separately identified.
Trident
Ms Rachel Squire: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what conditions apply to the nationality of consortiums seeking to become project managers for the nuclear fitting of Trident submarines. [25356]
Mr. Arbuthnot: To optimise control of nuclear licensing and safety requirements, project management of the construction of nuclear submarine refitting facilities at Devonport will be controlled by the dockyard operator, Devonport Royal Dockyard plc. The Secretary of State for Defence will retain a special share in DRD plc, a UK registered company, which will enable the Government to protect essential national security interests in the dockyard facilities, including those associated with nuclear submarine refitting. Company personnel working in sensitive areas are subject to appropriate security clearance.
Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Centre
Mr. Dunn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the defence agency status for the Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Centre. [25999]
Mr. Soames: I announced on 19 July 1995, Official Report, column 1345 that the joint air reconnaissance intelligence centre was a candidate for defence agency status. Since then, we have carried out a detailed business analysis of the organisation under the leadership of the chief executive designate to confirm its suitability to become an agency.
I have agreed to the launch of JARIC as a defence agency from 19 April 1996. The agency will remain fully part of the Department but the chief executive will have delegated executive powers to discharge his responsibilities. These powers are described in the framework document, copies of which will be placed in the Library of the House.
JARIC is based at RAF Brampton, near Huntingdon. It has a total staff of 500, comprising service personnel from all three services and approximately 144 civil servants. It acts as the Department's centre of excellence for the production of imagery intelligence.
It provides this intelligence to military commanders and the Government, in support of current military operations, defence planning and wider intelligence matters.
JARIC has been set demanding targets in an era where the requirement for its expertise is continuing to increase. The targets for the 12 months from April 1996 are:
18 Apr 1996 : Column: 585
Sir Irvine Patnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the Government will continue to support the export of defence equipment. [25910]
Mr. Arbuthnot:
UK defence exports have been a major success story for this country.
With a reducing home defence budget it is vital that we export if we are to maintain our defence industry which supports around 400,000 jobs. Between a third and half of the industry's output, by value, is for exports.
Selling more abroad also brings down the cost of equipment for our own forces and enables us to sustain our essential technology base.
In 1995, despite vigorous international competition from the US and France in particular, the UK won defence equipment contracts worth approximately £5 billion. This gave Britain the second highest market share ever. In no other major industrial sector have we managed to achieve nearly 20 per cent. of the world export market.
Maintaining a strong British defence industry is important for our national security, for the economy and for jobs. The responsible exporting of defence equipment to our friends and allies makes an important contribution to world peace and stability through deterring the expansionist aspirations of unfriendly and aggressive regimes. Article 51 of the UN charter clearly states the right of all nations to self-defence.
Moreover, the UK has a very strict policy on the control of exports of defence equipment. We promote the sale of British defence equipment overseas only in support of our national and international obligations and only where it is compatible with out political, strategic and security interests.
Mr. Jamieson:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if Devonport royal dockyard will retain its status as a royal dockyard following privatisation; and what its title will be. [25307]
Mr. Arbuthnot:
The subject of the proposed privatisation is the existing company Devonport Royal Dockyard plc, in which the assets of Devonport royal dockyard would be vested at the date of any sale. Her Majesty the Queen has graciously signified that she would be content for the royal title to continue to be used by the dockyard if it is privatised, subject to the use of the royal title being kept under constant review lest the activities of the dockyard develop in such a way as to
18 Apr 1996 : Column: 586
make the further use of the title inappropriate. Subject to that proviso, the use and continuation of the royal title will be a matter for the purchaser.
Mrs. Clwyd:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will (a) identify the print missing since 1991 from Admiralty house, (b) place a value on the missing work and (c) name the Minister described by the National Audit Office as a former Secretary of State. [20830]
Mr. Sproat:
I have been asked to reply.
The missing picture is a view of Admiralty house drawn in 1970 by Alan Dyson. As the work of an amateur artist it is particularly difficult to give it a commercial value. Our best estimate, given that its purchase price in 1970 was £10, is that its current value may be around £50 to £80. The drawing was placed on display in Admiralty house in 1970. The National Audit Office reference to a Secretary of State--who happened to be my right hon. Friend the member for Bridgwater (Mr. King) in 1991--is irrelevant to the loss of the drawing, which had been of unknown whereabouts since 1982.
Mr. Win Griffiths:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy at the UN Commission on Sustainable Development to be party to a global, legally binding treaty to ban the most dangerous identified persistent organic pollutants. [25414]
Mr. Clappison:
The Washington global conference on the protection of the marine environment from land-based activities agreed in November 1995 that international action is needed to develop a global, legally binding instrument concerning certain persistent organic pollutants. The United Kingdom supported that conclusion and will work to take it forward through the intergovernmental forum on chemical safety. Our stance at the Commission on Sustainable Development will be based on that approach.
Mr. Griffiths:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the most dangerous persistent organic pollutants that enter inland and coastal waters; and what action he intends to take in respect of the adoption of the United Nations environment programme programme of action on land-based sources of marine pollution. [25413]
Mr. Clappison:
The Washington global programme of action for the protection of the marine environment from land-based activities reflects generally the approaches adopted by the United Kingdom and other states bordering the north-east Atlantic. Pursuing our present policies will therefore lead to its implementation.
Key target 1: The completion of approved tasks, within agreed time frame, as follows:
Priority 1: 98 per cent.
Priority 2: 90 per cent.
Priority 3: 85 per cent.
Priority 4: 70 per cent.
Key target 2: By 1 October 1996 to determine a method of measuring Customer Satisfaction to reflect their quality requirements, and make proposals for its implementation.
These targets will ensure that JARIC meets defence needs for timely intelligence, and will provide for continuous improvement in services and efficiency.
Key target 3: Achieve a 2.5 per cent improvement in efficiency.
Key target 4: Provide specified support to a major project to upgrade JARIC's technical capabilities.
Key target 5: Introduce systems to meet the HM Treasury Accounts Direction to 1996-97.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |