Previous Section Index Home Page


Duke of York's Headquarters

Mr. Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of the Duke of York's Headquarters, Chelsea. [87836]

18 Jun 1999 : Column: 257

Mr. Spellar: On 8 July 1998, in connection with the publication of the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) we announced that the Duke of York's HQ in Chelsea would be sold and that its occupants, primarily the Territorial, Auxiliary & Volunteer Reserve Association for Greater London and Territorial Army units, would be re-accommodated as necessary. Since then, my Department has been considering how it might secure the optimum receipt for this prestigious site.

Following negotiations, and supported by advice from independent consultants, we have decided to proceed with a private treaty sale of the freehold of the site to Cadogan Estates, who own the principal adjoining site and are a special purchaser. The sale contract will be subject to Cadogan Estates achieving planning consent for an agreed planning application.

The agreed terms specify vacation of a considerable part of the site by March 2000. We require a longer period to finalise and prepare alternative locations for the affected units and we will vacate a further part of the site over the three years to 2003. Under the deal we have negotiated with Cadogan Estates, MOD retains an option for TA and cadet occupation in a small enclave within the site beyond 2003. However, we have not come to a decision yet on whether or not to exercise this option.

Military Deployment

Mr. Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the current proportion of (a) the Army and (b) Land Command (i) committed and (ii) warned to deploy for operations. [85913]

Mr. Doug Henderson [holding answer 8 June 1999]: As at 11 June, some 47 per cent. of the Army and some 72 per cent. of Land Command personnel were committed to operations. These figures include those preparing for and recovering from operations.

Figures for those "warned to deploy" do not meaningfully reflect the current level of operational commitment because the notice given to units depends on the circumstances of the individual unit and the commitment involved. They are a reflection of the current state of the administrative planning process used to identify suitable units to replace those currently on operations and some would be included in the figures for those committed to operations. However, if calculated on the same basis as my Answer of 22 April 1999, Official Report, column 633, the figures for those warned to deploy on operations would be some 24 per cent. of the Army and some 37 per cent. of Land Command.

18 Jun 1999 : Column: 258

Women (Armed Forces)

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on his policy on (i) retention and (ii) deployment of women in the armed forces. [86368]

Mr. Doug Henderson: All three Services are wholly committed to maximising employment opportunities for women in the armed forces, except where it is assessed that this could undermine combat effectiveness. 73 per cent. of posts in the Naval Service, 70 per cent. of posts in the Army and 96 per cent. of posts in the Royal Air Force are open to women.

The Secretary of State commissioned a review into those posts closed to women on the ground of combat effectiveness; that is, the Royal Marines General Service, the Infantry, the Royal Armoured Corps and the RAF Regiment. Following the review it was decided that 1,300 specialist posts in the Royal Marines filled by Royal Navy and Army personnel would be opened to women. The results of the review were set out in the report of the Strategic Defence Review (Comd 2999) published in July last year.

Studies are also being undertaken to assess the impact on combat effectiveness of increasing, to 70 per cent. the number of posts open to women in the Army and of allowing women to serve in "attached billets" in the Royal Marines. This work is due to complete in 2001.

As I said on 24 February 1999, Official Report, columns 300-01, we have decided that, following a review into the employment of women in submarines and in mine clearance diving branches, posts in these areas should remain closed on medical grounds.

Servicewomen currently represent around 7.7 per cent. of the total strength of the armed forces. In the 12 months to 1 April 1999, 12 per cent. of all new recruits were women; exit rates for women have remained relatively stable at 10 per cent.

Navy Crews

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Royal Navy ships currently at sea or operational have a shortfall in crew size broken down by (i) ship and (ii) discipline; and if he will make a statement. [86380]

Mr. Doug Henderson: The shortfalls for the Royal Navy Surface Flotilla ships currently at sea or operational as at 11 June 1999 are:

18 Jun 1999 : Column: 257

Gaps by branch Total
HM ShipComplementWarfareEngineeringSupplyShip's company
Alderney382----36
Atherstone421----41
Bicester411----40
Birmingham24191--231
Boxer2387--1230
Bridport333----30
Campbeltown22671--218
Cardiff24162--233
Chiddingfold44--1--43
Cottesmore381----37
Coventry2298----221
Cromer362----34
Dasher21----1
Dumbarton Castle531----52
Exeter23281--223
Fearless5351356511
Glasgow23933--233
Gloucester24491--234
Grafton1635----158
Grimsby351----34
Guernsey403----37
Hurworth401----39
Illustrious6431362622
Inverness36--1--35
Invincible670741658
Iron Duke16511--163
Leeds Castle4041--35
Lindisfarne39----138
Marlborough1663----163
Middleton431----42
Monmouth1663----163
Montrose16641--161
Newcastle22611----215
Norfolk1653----162
Northumberland1656----159
Orwell262--123
Pembroke35----134
Penzance3611--34
Quorn404----36
Richmond16521--162
Sandown371----36
Sheffield2291631209
Shetland391----38
Sutherland1636--1156
Walney371----36
Westminster16521--162

There are no submarines operating below their full crew complement.


18 Jun 1999 : Column: 259

18 Jun 1999 : Column: 259

Royal Navy Ships

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which Royal Navy ships have been deployed for more than six months in the last two years and in each case for how long they were deployed; and if he will make a statement. [86383]

Mr. Doug Henderson: Royal Navy ships deployed for more than six months in the period 31 May 1997 to 31 May 1999 are as follows:

ShipDays deployed
HMS Brave220
HMS Coventry217
HMS Liverpool195
HMS Newcastle196
HMS Nottingham214
HMS Westminster198
HMS London194
HMS Northumberland199
HMS Leeds Castle284
HMS Alderney188
HMS Guernsey199
HMS Shetland188
HMS Cumberland234
HMS Grafton204
HMS Sheffield203
HMS Sutherland204
HMS Dumbarton Castle365
HMS Scott219
HMS Orkney188


18 Jun 1999 : Column: 260

These figures represent the total number of days that the various ships were deployed, but in a number of cases the crews were changed during the course of the deployment.

Army Complement

Mr. Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list, by regiment and other section headings (a) the official complement and (b) the actual numbers in post in the Army. [87005]

Mr. Doug Henderson: Different Service Arms attach the term "Regiment" to varying sizes of formation, and not all of them further divide their "official complement" (referred to internally as the Liability, or the "Manpower Planning Target"). The following information is provided in terms of Arm/Service.

The following table provides details of each Service Arm's Strength and Liability, and the difference between the two, as at 1 April 1999. In line with our normal practice, the figures provided include the UK Trained Adult Personnel and Gurkhas, but exclude the Royal Irish (Home Service) Regiment and officers and soldiers under training. The figures shown for the Gurkhas include some three hundred men who form the Gurkha reinforcement companies which are attached to three infantry regiments, and a number of Gurkhas held over Liability to fill key posts elsewhere. I should also point out that the figures do not include 98 officers and 485 soldiers from the Reserves who are mobilised in Bosnia, or 226 Full Time Reservist Service personnel.

18 Jun 1999 : Column: 261

The liability and trained strength, by Arm/Service, of the Army

Arm/ServiceLiability(5)Strength+/-
Staff Officers689725+36
Household Cavalry/Royal Armoured Corps5,9495,492-457
Royal Artillery8,6217,869-752
Royal Engineers8,3368,653+317
Royal Signals9,0458,174-871
Infantry27,32124,972-2,349
Army Air Corps1,7061,540-166
Royal Army Chaplain's Department137135-2
Royal Logistic Corps15,86015,224-636
Royal Army Medical Corps2,7202,720-328
Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers10,0699,560-509
Adjutant General's Corps6,9547,034+80
Royal Army Veterinary Corps165132-33
Small Arms School Corps140149+9
Royal Army Dental Corps428350-78
Intelligence Corps1,2161,095-121
Army Physical Training Corps393386-7
Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps882667-215
Corps of Army Musicians1,1611,051-110
General List02+2
Unallocated0125+125
Long Service List597573-24
Gurkhas2,8823,374+492
Total105,27199,674-5,597

(5) To implement the Post-SDR force structure the Army's Manpower Requirement (Liability) for Regular Forces (including Gurkhas, but excluding R IRISH (HS) Full Time, Territorial Army and Full Time Reserve Personnel) will increase to 108,439 by 1 April 2005.


Mr. Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the shortfall in the official complement of the Army on 1 May (a) 1997 and (b) 1998. [87035]

Mr. Doug Henderson: The shortfall of UK Trained Army Personnel as at 1 May 1997 and 1 May 1998 was 5,406 and 5,438 respectively, and for Gurkha Trained Personnel, a surplus of 473 existed on both dates. These figures exclude Royal Irish (Home Service), and reserve personnel mobilised for duties associated with Bosnia, Full Time Reserve Personnel and Locally Employed Personnel.


Next Section Index Home Page