Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ms Kelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what research his Department has undertaken into the number of former and serving personnel suffering from severe cases of post-traumatic stress disorder; [141217]
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 725W
Dr. Moonie: I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the application of the Crichel Down rules to the former RAF Chilmark; what progress has been made in identifying former owners; and when a new trust will be established to manage the site. [141040]
Mr. Spellar: I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether Scots Guardsmen Fisher and Wright will be deployed for service in Northern Ireland; [141105]
Mr. Spellar: I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what were the exceptional circumstances taken into consideration by the Army Board which enable James Fisher and Mark Wright to remain in the Army. [141015]
Dr. Moonie: The decision of the Army Board reflects the view of an employer about the future service of two employees. Queen's Regulations allow for the retention of individuals who have received a custodial sentence where there are exceptional reasons that make retention desirable. The Board gave the fullest possible consideration to all of the relevant circumstances of the case before coming to its decision. This is a confidential matter for the employer, the Army, and the employees. Given the degree of public interest we have been as open as we could be about the Board proceedings and we have confirmed the outcome. To go further than that, and to release the Determination of summary of its contents, which inevitably covers matters personal to the soldiers, would clearly be inappropriate.
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for (1) what reason former Gulf veterans are informed they can only obtain copies of their military medical records if they give a declaration that they do not intend to sue his Department; [141079]
(3) what reason Gulf veterans seeking a copy of their military medical records have to state that their cases are not ones in which his Department is currently interested. [141080]
Mr. Spellar: I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 726W
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Gulf veterans have died since April 1995; how many of them (a) claimed to be suffering from Gulf War Syndrome and (b) claimed to be suffering from symptoms of an ill-defined nature caused by service in the Gulf War; how many deaths in (a) and (b) were suicides; and if he will make a statement. [141017]
Mr. Spellar: According to my Department's records, in the period 1 April 1995 to 28 November 2000, 278 UK Gulf veterans (service and ex-service personnel) died. None of these records show "Gulf War Syndrome" as a cause of death. Records are not available indicating whether those who died claimed to be suffering from Gulf War Syndrome or whether they claimed to be suffering from the symptoms of an ill-defined nature caused by service in the Gulf conflict. Of the 278 UK Gulf veterans who died, 50 deaths were categorised under the International Classification of Diseases 9th Edition Revision 1977 as due to
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reason ill Gulf veterans have not been offered tests for exposure to depleted uranium. [140492]
Mr. Spellar: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) on 29 November 2000, Official Report, column 643W.
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what warnings were given to British troops about the use of ammunition containing depleted uranium prior to (a) the Gulf War and (b) service in Kosovo; [140493]
Mr. Spellar: Early in the 1990-1991 Gulf conflict, the Ministry of Defence decided that the DU-based tank round should be brought into service to give our forces a better capability against Iraqi tanks. At the same time a bulletin was produced setting out safety procedures. Explosive ordnance disposal personnel, whose work entailed a direct risk of significant exposure, were provided with detailed instructions on the precautions that they should take to protect their health. Instructions were also issued to Ordnance Corps personnel involved in the handling, transportation and storage of the ammunition. It appears that tank crews and other personnel were not issued with such advice. This omission was publicly recognised by MOD in July 1993.
More recently, a copy of a signal message dated 25 February 1991, from the MOD to one Armoured Division in Saudi Arabia, has been found. The signal provides advice on measures to be taken to prevent exposure to respirable DU dust hazards. Although it is suggested that a subsequent signal was sent promulgating
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 727W
the advice to other units in theatre, so far, no evidence has been found among contemporary records to substantiate whether this advice was in fact promulgated.
Service personnel deployed to Kosovo are given appropriate force protection advice including available appropriate protective equipment, including gloves and respiratory equipment, which they should wear if they encounter targets suspected of being damaged by DU-based ammunition.
Mr. Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent assessment he has made of the effects of depleted uranium on the health of British troops in Yugoslavia. [141209]
Mr. Spellar: I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the threat to old underground chemical weapon stores from recent flooding. [141207]
Dr. Moonie: I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mrs. Fitzsimons: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the use of the Warrior armoured vehicle. [141259]
Mr. Spellar: A number of precautionary operating restrictions have been put in place on the use of the Warrior Armoured Vehicle. Over the past nine months there have been three separate incidents of a failure in the drive shaft system of Warrior vehicles. Damage has also been found in a further four vehicles following a fleet-wide inspection programme that was initiated following a failure in February. The most recent failure occurred on 17 November 2000. Prior to this year Warrior had experienced only two similar failures since entering service in 1987.
The particular problem concerns the universal joint of the drive shaft system. On each occasion the joint has broken causing a loss of drive, braking and steering to the left-hand track of the vehicle. In view of the potential safety implications of further failures restrictions have been introduced. The main restrictions are the introduction of a 30 kph speed limit, limited use on public roads and an increase in the frequency of inspections.
Work on a technical solution is well advanced and trials of a modification are under way. If these trials prove successful, delivery and fitting of modified drive shafts is expected to begin in March 2001 with all 786 vehicles expected to be converted by August 2001.
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he will announce a decision on the sale of Serles House in Winchester. [140906]
30 Nov 2000 : Column: 728W
Dr. Moonie: I wrote to the hon. Member on 29 November, together with all other hon. Members who had previously expressed an interest in the future of Serles House, to say that I have agreed that the property should be sold to Hampshire County Council (subject to access arrangements being resolved).
My officials have written to the council and to other interested parties in similar terms.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |