---

Nuclear Weapons

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will undertake a review of the (a) manufacture of nuclear warheads at Aldermaston/Burghfield by AWE plc, (b) deployment of Trident 2 as the UK's nuclear deterrent, (c) use of Faslane as the Trident submarine base and (d) commitment to maintain a nuclear deterrent. [4293]

Mr. Ingram: Following a fundamental re-examination of the issues, the 1998 Strategic Defence Review concluded that a minimum nuclear deterrent would remain a necessary element of our security. It determined that our deterrence requirements would be met by one Trident

19 Jul 2001 : Column: 332W

ballistic missile submarine on patrol at all times carrying 48 nuclear warheads, and a national stockpile of less than 200 operationally available warheads. I see no reason to conduct a further review.

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on his compliance with paragraph 105F of the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. [4294]

Mr. Hoon: Paragraph 105F of the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on the legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, given in July 1996, states that:

"There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control". The UK had already signed and ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1968. Article VI of the NPT commits all Parties to the Treaty

"to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control".

At the 2000 NPT Review Conference the United Kingdom, together with other participating countries, gave an unequivocal undertaking to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament to which all states are committed under Article VI of the NPT. At the Review Conference the UK, together with other participating countries, also agreed to the establishment in the Conference of Disarmament of an appropriate body with a mandate to deal with nuclear disarmament.

Discrimination (Compensation)

Dr. Evan Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 9 July 2001, Official Report, column 362W, on discrimination, how many outstanding compensation claims there are for (a) men and (b) women discriminated against on the basis of their sexuality following the ruling of the ECHR. [5279]

Mr. Ingram: There are 54 outstanding compensation claims from service personnel claiming that they were discriminated against on the basis of their sexuality following the ruling of the ECHR. Of these 41 are for men and 13 are for women.

Prisoners of War

Mr. Levitt: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the British servicemen held as prisoners in Auschwitz during the second world war are known to be still alive; and what memorials exist to (a) them and (b) those who were interned in other such camps. [5076]

Dr. Moonie: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not hold complete information on how many British service men held as prisoners of war during the second world war are still alive.

All of those who lost their lives during the world wars are commemorated through the nation's central memorial, the Cenotaph. The MOD holds no central record of memorials erected at individual sites overseas.

19 Jul 2001 : Column: 333W

Training and Assistance

David Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the (a) countries and (b) organisations which have received British military (i) training and (ii) assistance since 1997. [5342]

Mr. Hoon: I will write to the right hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

HMS Cromer

Mr. Quentin Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to dispose of HMS Cromer. [3525]

Mr. Ingram [holding answer 17 July 2001]: On current plans, HMS Cromer is due to be withdrawn from service towards the end of 2001. Plans for her disposal are currently under review.

National Missile Defence

Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received on (a) Fylingdales and (b) Menwith Hill in relation to recent proposals to install a national missile defence system at Fort Greely, Alaska; and if he will make a statement. [4856]

Mr. Hoon: In testimony to the US Senate Armed Services Committee on 12 July, the director of the US Ballistic Missile Defence Organisation set out plans to expand their ballistic missile defence "test bed" to include up to five ground-based silos at Fort Greely, Alaska. He stated that:

"if directed, this test bed could also provide a basis for a contingency defensive capability if the security environment warrants".

However, facilities in the UK will not form part of this test bed; the US Administration have not decided what sort of missile defences it will ultimately seek to deploy; and the US Administration have made no request for the use of facilities in the UK for missile defence purposes.

Six-nation Framework Agreement

Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which existing collaborative projects will become co-operative armaments programmes under the Six-nation Framework Agreement. [5360]

Dr. Moonie: Existing collaborative projects are already subject to their own conditions and procedures. It is too early to say whether there would be benefits from seeking to apply Framework Agreement procedures to such programmes.

Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which Government Departments will be involved in approving the permitted export lists under the Six- nation Framework Agreement. [5359]

Dr. Moonie: The Government Departments involved will be the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Ministry of Defence, Department of Trade and Industry and, as required, the Department for International Development, in line with their respective responsibilities.

19 Jul 2001 : Column: 334W

Nancekuke

Ms Atherton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, (1) pursuant to his answer of 11 July 2001, Official Report, column 581W, if he will place in the Library the incomplete record of materials which were deposited in the sea off the north Cornish coast when CDE Nancekuke was decommissioned; [5947]

(2) how the results of testing and decontamination of materials disposed of into the sea at Nancekuke when the base was decommissioned (a) were recorded and (b) will be published. [5791]

Dr. Moonie: I will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

Defence Training Review

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made on the implementation of the Defence Training Review and related training estate matters; and if he will make a statement. [5990]

Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the implications of the Defence Training Review for the future of RAF Halton. [4938]

Mr. Ingram: Work is in hand in the Ministry of Defence on the implementation of the Defence Training Review which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence announced to the House in March. A number of areas have been identified where rationalisation on a single site appears feasible, and scoping studies are taking place on these. These studies are examining, in the first instance, options for providing the training at MOD sites. These will serve as benchmarks, or Public Sector Comparators, against which a wider range of options can be considered. Wider options include potential partnerships with the private sector, and private sector providers are being encouraged to propose innovative solutions. These might involve establishing training establishments on completely new sites. The selection, therefore, of a benchmark site does not imply that the MOD has taken a decision to continue training on that site.

The sites being examined for these benchmarks or Public Sector Comparators are RAF Cosford for aeronautical engineering training; the Defence School of Transport at Leconfield for logistic training; Defence Intelligence and Security Centre at Chicksands for security, intelligence, language and photography training; the Royal School of Signals at Blandford for communications and information systems training; RAF Halton for joint personnel administration and police training and HMS Sultan for electro-mechanical engineering training. There will be implications for other sites at which elements of this training are carried out, but because work is at an early stage these cannot be quantified.

In parallel with the work on the Defence Training Review, the Royal Navy has been conducting a comprehensive review of the remainder of its training estate. It is now proposed to concentrate naval shore training over the next 10 years at the Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth, HMS Raleigh in the Plymouth area, and HMS Collingwood in Gosport. This will permit

19 Jul 2001 : Column: 335W

the delivery of more cost-effective training and improve operational capability. It will include the creation of an Integrated Maritime Warfare School at HMS Collingwood, which will deliver all maritime warfare training in a single site. As part of this programme, HMS Dryad in the Portsmouth area will become surplus to requirements and close by no later than 2011, although vigorous efforts will be made to advance this date to maximise the operational and financial benefits, and it is intended that substantial elements of the establishment will progressively transfer to HMS Collingwood over the next few years. Changes are also planned at HMS Excellent in Portsmouth, which has been announced as the future site for key elements of the Royal Navy's Fleet Headquarters.

Detailed proposals for all the above measures will be subject to normal consultative procedures at the appropriate time.

---