| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
WE-177 Bomb
Mr. Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what have been the operating costs of the WE-177 bomb in each of the past 15 years at 1995-96 prices. [16562]
Mr. Soames: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen) on 18 December 1996, Official Report, column 627.
Environmental Information Regulations
Mr. Foulkes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many inquiries have been received by his Department under the terms of the Environmental Information Regulations 1992; how many of these have been refused, and on what grounds; what has been the cost of substantive responses to such requests; and what amount has been received from those making requests towards recovery of these costs. [16807]
Mr. Soames: My Department's records indicate that, from 1 January 1993 to 31 January 1997, we received 108 questions. Before November 1995, only queries quoting the Environmental Information Regulations 1992 were classed as made under those terms. Subsequently, all queries on environmental issues have been treated as made under EIR92; 102 such queries have been received. None has been refused an answer.
My Department seeks to recover costs only if it is estimated that the work involved will exceed four man hours. Questioners in such cases are advised beforehand of the estimated costs and asked to confirm that they wish to proceed; to date, none has done so.
No records are made of the actual costs of providing substantive answers for which no charge is raised.
Mr. Brazier:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he is taking to adapt the readiness of the Army to changing strategic circumstances. [17103]
20 Feb 1997 : Column: 715
Mr. Portillo:
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact, we can assume that we would have longer warning of any re-emerging threat to the UK or western Europe by conventional forces. On the other hand, recent events have underlined that it is important that we should be able to dispatch forces rapidly to deal with crises elsewhere.
In response, I have decided to shift the balance of investment in the Army further towards those units required to be at higher operational readiness. The changes build on the one army concept by taking account of the synergy between regular and reserve units.
For the two parachute battalions in the joint rapid deployment force, the present enhancement of some 105 Gurkhas will finish in 2000. The strengths of each battalion will then be increased by some 60 posts. With effect from 1 April this year, arrangements will be made to provide dedicated manpower and equipment for the Pathfinders--5 Airborne Brigade's reconnaissance platoon.
I have also decided to increase the manning levels of two of our three multiple-launch rocket system regiments by some 100 posts each to ensure they are fully ready to deploy without the need for reinforcement from elsewhere in the Army. The third regiment will not be required for short-notice operations. I have therefore decided that it should be transferred to the Territorial Army, in place of one of its two FH 70--155mm howitzer--artillery regiments. Consequently, the TA will be equipped with one of the Army's most modern and powerful equipments.
At the same time, we now assess that the majority of the TA will not be required for short-notice operations as formed units. Those units can therefore be moved to more extended readiness. That will not, however, reduce the scope for TA personnel to take part as individuals, or in small teams, in a wide range of operations. That is demonstrated by their significant and invaluable contribution in Bosnia. Furthermore, opportunities for individuals will be significantly improved by the Reserve Forces Act 1996. There will be no change to the establishment levels of the TA, or to the TA's vital role in deploying as formed units in a major crisis. We shall, however, be able to reduce the numbers required to be fully trained, while protecting training and activity levels across the whole range from individual to formation training. Certain specialist units will remain at higher readiness.
Some adjustments will also be made to the manning and equipment of the 12 regular light-roled national defence battalions to bring them in line with current requirements.
Dr. David Clark:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 18 December 1996, Official Report, column 630, on Gulf war syndrome, when he expects to answer the question relating to (a) Mr. Rucker's inquiry and (b) the number of missing medical records. [15961]
20 Feb 1997 : Column: 716
Mr. Soames:
I have written to the hon. Member and a copy has been placed in the Library of the House.
Dr. David Clark:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many BSE-infected carcases are stored at former RAF Quedgeley; and if he will make a statement.[16910]
Mr. Soames:
There are no BSE-infected carcases stored at RAF Quedgeley.
Mr. Foulkes:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the board of inquiry into the Nimrod accident in Canada in September 1995 found evidence that other members of the Nimrod's crew had expressed misgivings to the pilot concerning the manoeuvres to be flown in the air display.[16936]
Mr. Corbett:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate the value of efficiency savings made by (a) his Department, (b) the Royal Navy and (c) the Royal Air Force in each of the last three years. [16893]
Mr. Soames:
The information requested is available in the following publications, copies of which are in the Library of the House:
In the course of researching this question, an inconsistency in the reporting of the figures for 1993-94 has come to light. This is being examined and I will write to the hon. Member when the matter has been resolved. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Flynn:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what records are kept in respect of articles lost or stolen whose value is less than (a) £150,000, (b) £100,000 and (c) £50,000. [16674]
Mr. Arbuthnot:
All losses must be thoroughly investigated by the unit concerned and a full and factual record made. Losses under £100,000 value are reported as a total sum; those over £100,000 are reported individually.
Mr. Flynn:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the total cost of the items that have gone missing without explanation in each of the past three years; and what were the five most valuable items in each service in each year. [16675]
Mr. Arbuthnot:
Losses are reported individually only where the value exceeds £100,000. Unexplained losses over £100,000 during the last three financial years were as follows:
20 Feb 1997 : Column: 717
1993-94 : Departmental report by the MOD--the Government's expenditure plans 1995-96 to 1997-98 (Cm2801) (pages 30-31)
1994-95 : MOD performance report 1994-95 (Cm3055 (pages 36-37)
1995-96 : MOD performance report 1995-96 (Cm3448) (page 9)
| Value £ | |
|---|---|
| 1993-94 | |
| No cases | |
| 1994-95 | |
| 1. Thermal imager lost in transit | 118,000 |
| 2. Consignment of 3 in rockets lost in transit | 104,000 |
| 1995-96 | |
| 1. Radar receiver lost in transit | 130,000 |
| 2. One kit printed circuit lost in transit | 164,000 |
| 3. 12 Harrier forward relay panels lost in transit | 115,000 |
All losses were thoroughly investigated with a view to recovering the item in question and preventing a recurrence. When the search proved unsuccessful, the items in question were written off and noted in the relevant appropriation account.
Royal Flight
Mr. Corbett: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the average flying hours for each of the last five years of aircraft used by the royal family. [16886]
Mr. Soames: The total hours flown by the aircraft concerned, covering communications, VIP and royal tasks--plus essential training--are as follows:
| Financial year | BAe 146 | Wessex | BAe 125 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1992-93 | 1,769 | 740 | 4,645 |
| 1993-94 | 1,781 | 739 | 3,993 |
| 1994-95 | 1,440 | 791 | 3,511 |
| 1995-96 | 1,448 | 748 | 3,657 |
| 1996-97 (to 31 December 1996) | 1,085 | 502 | 2,578 |
Mr. Corbett: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the cost to public funds of pre-positioning aircraft of the royal squadron for the private use of a member of the royal family (a) in each of the last five years and (b) for the flight from Nassau to Rock sound in March 1996. [16892]
Mr. Soames: The information requested at (a) is not readily available and could not be produced without incurring disproportionate costs. With respect to (b), there was no cost to public funds associated with pre-positioning as the aircraft was already in Nassau in support of official business.
Mr. Corbett: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what basis repayments are calculated for private use of aircraft of the royal squadron. [16888]
Mr. Soames:
The basis of the charge for private use of aircraft of No. 32 (The Royal) Squadron is the marginal cost of operating the aircraft for the particular flight. Where appropriate, a "waiting" charge of £60 per hour is also levied. The only exception to this approach is when a member of the royal family is advised to use an aircraft of No. 32--the royal--squadron for safety or security reasons for a private journey when he or she could otherwise have used a commercial service. In such circumstances, the household in question will be charged the equivalent commercial rate.
20 Feb 1997 : Column: 718
Mr. Corbett:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what rules govern whether a journey involving an aeroplane of the royal squadron is official or private. [16887]
Mr. Soames:
A journey by a member of the royal family involving the use of an aircraft of No. 32 (The Royal) Squadron is considered to be official if it is undertaken in pursuance of royal duties.
Mr. Corbett:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what were the payments made to his Department for private flights in aircraft of the royal squadron by members of the royal family in each of the years 1990 to 1994. [16885]
Mr. Soames:
In accordance with the wishes of Her Majesty the Queen, the costs of private flights in aircraft of No. 32 (The Royal) Squadron have been reimbursed to the MOD since 1 April 1995. Accordingly, no such payments were made in the period 1990 to 1994.
Mr. Corbett:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer to the hon. member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice), of 31 January, Official Report, column 436, relating to royal flights, if he will list the equivalent data for 1995. [16912]
Mr. Soames:
In accordance with the wishes of Her Majesty the Queen, the costs of private flights in aircraft of No. 32 (The Royal) Squadron have been reimbursed to the MOD since 1 April 1995. The information requested for the period 1 April 1995 to 31 December 1995 is as follows:
| Date of journey | Passenger | Route | Cost reimbursed £ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 July 1995 | HRH The Duke of Edinburgh | Sandringham to Kensington Palace | 1,215 |
| 1 July 1995 | HRH The Duke of Edinburgh | Kensington Palace to Sandringham | 1,325 |
| 1 July 1995 | HRH The Prince of Wales | Dyce to RAF Northolt | 735 |
| 1 July 1995 | HRH The Prince of Wales | Heathrow to Dyce | 735 |
| 3 September 1995 | Her Majesty The Queen | Dyce to Teesside | 1,558 |
| 5 September 1995 | Her Majesty The Queen | Teesside to Dyce | 1,558 |
| 10 December 1995 | Her Majesty The Queen | Blackpool to Northolt | 1,186.67 |
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |