| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Kosovo
Mr. Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the planned deployment of Territorial Army (i) units and (ii) individual personnel in Kosovo; and what reassessment he is making of the Strategic Defence Review following the engagement of British troops in the Balkans. [81251]
Mr. George Robertson: There are no plans to deploy units of the Territorial Army (TA) to Kosovo. Our policy is that TA commitments in the Balkans should continue to be met by individuals on a voluntary basis. The principles which underpin the Strategic Defence Review remain valid, and are not affected by the current deployment in the Balkans. However, full account will be taken of any lessons learned.
Wellington Barracks Electronic Range Simulator
Mr. Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the reduction of access to Wellington Barracks Electronic Range Simulator. [81247]
Mr. Doug Henderson:
There has been no change in the policy regarding access to the small arms trainer (SAT) at Wellington Barracks, although more units are using it now that the similar facility at Chelsea has been transferred to Hounslow. SAT operators from the resident battalion have been away on overseas training and this may have reduced access temporarily.
21 Apr 1999 : Column: 562
Ms Julie Morgan:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the countries (a) from which police officers have visited the UK and (b) have been visited by United Kingdom military personnel to receive training or other military assistance under the Defence Military Assistance Fund since 1 April 1997. [81378]
Mr. Doug Henderson:
From 6 to 13 December 1997, a member of the Export Support Team (Royal Engineers) visited the Royal Malaysian Police Bomb Disposal Unit to provide after sales training in equipment used in bomb disposal operations.
Mr. Gordon Prentice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the constituents of the emergency rations issued to Army personnel in the field. [81350]
Mr. Spellar:
Personnel deployed in the field are normally fed using Operational Ration Packs when fresh food supply is not practicable or in the period before a fresh food supply chain can be established. The rations replicate normal feeding patterns by providing breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks together with hot and cold drinks and are designed either for consumption under group feeding arrangements or for issue to the individual. There are currently seven menu variations. The ration packs can have up to 24 components, which vary depending on the ration type and the menu. The constituents range from ancillaries such as can openers and toilet tissue through snack items, such as biscuits and beverage sachets, to main meal items of meat and vegetables and a dessert.
Mr. Dismore:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress on the review of the War Pensions Scheme. [81484]
Mr. Doug Henderson:
The War Pensions Scheme is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security.
The MOD and DSS are currently reviewing arrangements for compensation service personnel or their bereaved where disablement or death is due to service in the Forces. The aim is to make proposals for a new compensation scheme that could replace the current War Pension Scheme and the attributable provisions of the Armed Forces Pension Scheme. The War Pension Scheme would, however, remain available for those who have already left the Armed Forces including current war pensioners.
We expect the review to report in the Summer. A separate review is being conducted into the main provision of the Armed Forces Pension Scheme, for which the Secretary of State for Defence is responsible. We expect recommendations to emerge around the end of this year.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a copy of the United Kingdom submissions for the NATO fiftieth anniversary meeting to be held in Washington on 23 to
21 Apr 1999 : Column: 563
25 April; and if he will make a statement on the submissions made by (a) Germany and (b) Canada on the role of nuclear weapons within the NATO force structure. [81573]
Mr. George Robertson:
The United Kingdom has played a full part in the confidential consideration between Allies of the various issues which will be discussed at the forthcoming NATO Summit. As is normal, the details of the UK contribution to such international negotiations are not made public and I am therefore withholding the information requested under Exemption 1 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information--defence, security and international relations.
The principles underlying the Government's approach have been set out in evidence given by me, my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and senior officials to the Defence Select Committee's inquiry into the future of NATO, published on 13 April in the Committee's Third Report of Session 1998-99 (HC 39), as well as in debates and in answers to Questions in both Houses. I have also made a number of speeches, which are available on the Ministry of Defence's World Wide Web site, http:/www.mod/uk.
The views of other Allies on NATO issues are a matter for the Governments concerned.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will set out under which headings in his Departmental cash plans contained in Cm 4208, nuclear weapons (a) procurement, (b) deployment, (c) storage and (d) related maintenance activities are contained. [81499]
Mr. George Robertson:
Costs relating to nuclear weapons procurement are contained in Vote 1 subheads K and L. Costs associated with the storage of nuclear weapons and related maintenance activities are contained in Vote 1 subhead F. Vote 1 subhead A covers the front line operating costs of the deterrent.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received recently from Abolition 2000 in respect of NATO's nuclear weapon policy and the NATO review meeting due to be held on 23 to 25 April in Washington DC. [81574]
Mr. George Robertson:
Several officials in my Department have received copies of an identical letter, sent by Mr. Frank Blackaby of Abolition 2000 on 6 April 1999, concerning NATO nuclear policy and the review of the Alliance's Strategic Concept.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made by Russia and the United States in ratification of the Start II Nuclear Arms Control Treaty. [81478]
Mr. George Robertson:
The United States Senate ratified START II on 26 January 1996. The Russian Duma has yet to do so.
Mr. Cox:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent discussions he has had with other members of the European Union on developing a peacekeeping and crisis management policy. [81428]
21 Apr 1999 : Column: 564
Mr. George Robertson:
In the context of the debate on further arrangements for European security and defence launched by the Prime Minister last autumn, European Union Member States have agreed to strengthen the Common Foreign and Security Policy, including through the development of a security and defence capacity. EU activities envisaged in this field are set out in the Amsterdam Treaty, and include humanitarian and rescue tasks and tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peacemaking. I have had a variety of discussions with all EU partners, and NATO Allies on the means by which we might give effect to this.
Mr. Maclean:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish the agenda for the forthcoming NATO summit on 24 to 25 April. [81490]
Mr. George Robertson:
The scheduling of meetings, and the topics to be discussed at each one, during the NATO Summit, are still under consideration. Besides discussing the situation in the Balkans NATO's Heads of State and Government, Foreign and Defence Ministers, and colleagues from member countries of the Euro- Atlantic Partnership Council, will have a substantial range of issues to consider and important decisions will be taken on the continuing adaptation of NATO to meet the challenges of the future.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what weapons using depleted uranium have been sent with British military forces involved in the NATO military action against Yugoslavia; and what (a) depleted uranium shells and (b) other missiles using depleted shells have been used in the conflict. [81582]
Mr. George Robertson:
I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon Friend the Member for Bristol, West (Valerie Davey) on 13 April 1999, Official Report, column 43.
Mrs. Gilroy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his latest estimate of the cost of the Trident Acquisition programme; and if he will make a statement. [81950]
Mr. George Robertson:
The current estimate of the total acquisition cost of the Trident programme, with payments already made expressed at the prices and exchange rates actually incurred and future spend at the rates assumed in the latest long-term costing of the Defence programme (the hybrid estimate), is now £9,756 million. Leaving aside the effects of price inflation and exchange rate variation (+£21 million and -£1 million respectively), there has been a real cost reduction since last year of £52 million. Expenditure on the Trident acquisition programme to 30 September 1998 represented some 94 per cent. of this estimate. If all expenditure, past and projected, is brought up to the latest long-term costing conditions (the non-hybrid estimate) the estimate is £12,870 million.
21 Apr 1999 : Column: 565
Note:
Figures rounded to nearest £ million hence any apparent imbalances.
21 Apr 1999 : Column: 565
21 Apr 1999 : Column: 565
The programme also continues to show an overall reduction in real terms on its original 1982 estimate. This reduction, including the savings resulting from the decision to process missiles at the United States facility at Kings Bay, Georgia now stands at over £3.7 billion at current prices.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |