| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Office Running Costs
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the cost for the current financial year of running the office of the Secretary of State for Wales. [116328]
Mr. Paul Murphy: The running costs budget for the Wales Office is £2,030,000 for 1999-2000, including Lord Lieutenants' expenditure.
Steel Industry
Mr. Barry Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment he has made of the prospects for the steel industry in Wales; and if he will make a statement. [116232]
Mr. Paul Murphy: I am extremely optimistic about the future of the Welsh steel industry, particularly in light of the substantial restructuring the UK steel industry has undergone making it among the most efficient and cleanest in the world.
Naturally the Government keenly maintain an on-going dialogue with the steel industry.
National Assembly
Mr. Wigley: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will bring forward legislation to empower the National Assembly for Wales to amend those Acts which have effect in Wales; and if he will make a statement. [115954]
Mr. Paul Murphy: A general power for the Assembly to amend Acts of the UK Parliament having effect in Wales would be unconstrained and inconsistent with the devolution settlement for Wales.
There are, and will continue to be, occasions when it is appropriate to give the National Assembly a power to amend Acts of Parliament for particular purposes. Powers of this kind are included in the Government of Wales Act 1998 and the Health Act 1999 and also in the Care Standards Bill, the Local Government Bill and the Transport Bill.
Employment Statistics
Mrs. Ann Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what figures he can require from local authorities about the composition of their workforces in terms of (a) standard age groups, (b) ethnic origins and (c) gender. [104014]
Mr. Paul Murphy:
I do not have executive functions which would require me to seek this kind of information from local authorities. My statutory powers to obtain
29 Mar 2000 : Column: 159W
information from local authorities were transferred to the National Assembly for Wales by the National Assembly for Wales (Transfer of Functions) Order 1999 No. 672. Among these powers is section 141(2) of the Local Government Act 1972 which allows the Assembly to require any information held by or available to a principal council in consequence of the exercise of any of the council's statutory powers.
AWE Sites
Mr. Salter: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on what arrangements have been made to operate the Atomic Weapons Establishment sites at Aldermaston and Burghfield from 1 April. [117045]
Mr. Spellar: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence announced on 21 February 2000, Official Report, column 1223, that we were reviewing the AWE contract to operate Aldermaston and Burghfield to ensure the pre-eminence of public health and safety. The Government have always made it clear that we would not allow the AWE Management Ltd. consortium to take over the operation of AWE unless we were convinced that safety would not be compromised.
As part of this review each nominee for a director's post at AWE was checked for suitability and to confirm they were not connected with any of the incidents that have caused concern at Lockheed Martin's US facilities or to problems at BNFL Sellafield. The Chief of Defence Procurement also carried out a detailed scrutiny of the terms and conditions of the contract placed with AWE ML. He has confirmed that safety was treated as the highest priority.
The Chief Executive of the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) has also confirmed that he is satisfied with the ability of AWE ML to operate the sites safely and effectively. He has therefore issued new nuclear site licences. The Environment Agency (EA) has already granted new site discharge authorisations under the Radioactive Substances Act to take effect from 1 April. As a condition of this the EA require AWE ML to submit a report by 30 April 2000 of any proposed changes to the existing management systems and resources and not to implement any changes without the prior consent of the EA. The NII and EA will of course continue to monitor rigorously the safety performance of the new company. Both have also agreed separately to carry out in-depth reviews of all aspects of safety at AWE and to issue public reports after three and 12 months.
Hugh Collum, the new Chairman of BNFL, is currently preparing a report for the Department of Trade and Industry on management and organisation at Sellafield and he has assured us that there will be nothing in his review that could reasonably be read as detrimental to the safe operation of AWE. The NII has also assured the MOD that the problems experienced at Sellafield will have no application to BNFL's proposed role as a shareholder in the AWE ML consortium.
29 Mar 2000 : Column: 160W
A strict and comprehensive safety regime already exists, monitored by MOD officials as well as the EA and NII. All three authorities carry out regular inspections and have the powers to scrutinise any paperwork, interview any individual, and visit any of the facilities at Aldermaston or Burghfield. They have the authority to close down any part or all of the facilities for whatever reason should safety be put at risk. AWE ML does not have the authority to alter significantly the existing operating procedures without first seeking the approval of the regulators.
In view of the satisfactory outcome of these checks along with the effectiveness of the existing safety regime at AWE, we are satisfied that safety will not be compromised by the implementation of the new contract. This is also the opinion of the EA and the NII. Accordingly, we have decided that AWE ML will take over operation of the AWE sites as from 1 April 2000. However, we will continue to scrutinise closely the safety performance of the new management. We will also be looking to the new operators to preserve and, where possible, extend the policy of openness adopted by Hunting BRAE over the last seven years.
Mr. Hancock:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the benefits to the United Kingdom of the German Army joining the L15A4 projectile programme; and if he will make a statement. [113899]
Dr. Moonie:
None. We are currently in the process of procuring the L15A3 155 mm high explosive artillery shell as part of a five year large calibre training ammunition contract which was placed with Royal Ordnance in December 1998. An assessment of possible options for a new generation of high explosive shell to replace existing L15A2 and A3 shells has not yet been undertaken. We do not therefore have an approved L15A4 projectile programme, but any future procurement of a replacement for our existing L15 shells would examine all options, including collaboration.
Mr. Cohen:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what studies his Department has carried out into the movement of anti-personnel landmines in flood waters. [114370]
Mr. Spellar:
None. My Department is keeping the possible requirement for such studies under review.
Mr. Evans:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people left (a) the Army, (b) the Royal Navy and (c) the Royal Air Force in (i) 1996, (ii) 1997, (iii) 1998 and (iv) 1999. [116326]
Mr. Spellar:
The total number of people leaving the UK Regular Forces in 1996-99 is as follows:
29 Mar 2000 : Column: 161W
| Army | Naval Service | RAF | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 15,368 | 7,123 | 10.542 |
| 1997 | 13,993 | 5,263 | 7,512 |
| 1998 | 17,074 | 5,508 | 4,838 |
| 1999 | 15,951 | 5,889 | 4,712 |
The titles Army, Naval Service and RAF include Nursing Services. Naval Service includes Royal Navy and Royal Marines.
These figures are taken from Tri-Service Publication 1, which is available in the Library of the House.
Mr. Hancock:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what is the average amount of money that has been expected to have been paid back by service personnel in the last 10 years in the (a) Royal Navy, (b) Army and (c) RAF who have received university education through cadetships and have subsequently left before completion of service; how this sum of money is calculated; and if he will make a statement; [116511]
(3) how many people were recruited into the (a) RAF, (b) Army and (c) Royal Navy on cadetships and how many of them (i) had their fees paid and (ii) received a salary, in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement; [116512]
(4) what are the conditions relating to the award of cadetships in the (a) RAF, (b) Navy and (c) Army when students join the services, have their fees and a grant paid to them while completing university and then subsequently leave the force; what is his policy on the repayment of such funds by cadets if they leave before completion of service; and if he will make a statement; [116513]
(5) how many (a) Army, (b) RAF and (c) Royal Navy personnel who were awarded cadetships in the last 10 years subsequently left before completion of service; [116510]
(6) on what occasions in the last 10 years Army personnel leaving other than on health grounds were allowed to forgo repayment of money received from the Army for the cost of university education. [116559]
Mr. Spellar:
I will write to the hon. Member and copies of my letters will be placed in the Library of the House.
(2) how many (a) Army, (b) RAF and (c) Navy personnel who were awarded cadetships in the last 10 years and subsequently left before completion of service were required to pay back money received for university education; how much money was expected to be paid back; how many cadets were required to pay the full amount; and if repayment was weighted against the time that they served; [116515]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |