|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Love: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 17 July 2001, Official Report, column 145W, on locally engaged staff, what reference is made in setting pay levels of locally engaged civilian staff to the local poverty datum line; whether the pay levels can fall below local poverty datum lines; and if he will make a statement. 
Dr. Moonie: This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The pay and terms of service of locally engaged staff are
13 Dec 2001 : Column: 968W
determined by processes which involve surveys of local employers. The employers used in such surveys are reputable and are chosen as representative of responsible local employment practice. Such employers include, for example, the Brunei Government for pay surveys in Brunei and the US embassy for pay surveys in Nepal. In Germany, where the largest proportion of locally engaged civilians are employed, pay and terms of service are negotiated centrally by the Germany Federal Ministry of Finance and the national Trade Unions in accordance with the Collective Tariff Agreement applicable to the NATO Sending States. Terms and conditions of service also reflect the requirements of local employment law.
There is no reason to believe, therefore, that locally engaged civilians employed by the Ministry of Defence are disadvantaged in any way.
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the Review of Warship Maintenance and Support; what discussions are being held on privatisation; and what assessment has been made of potential job losses. 
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 12 December 2001]: The Warship Support Modernisation initiative is looking at ways to modernise support arrangements across all UK Naval Bases and Dockyards, and, by reducing national spare capacity, to achieve savings for the defence budget. We have received proposals from the Dockyard Companies for the provision of certain Naval Base outputs in partnering arrangements with the Naval Base Commanders. These are now being assessed alongside alternative proposals received from our joint Trade Unions. All options are being evaluated fully and without prejudice. Decisions on the way ahead are expected early next year.
Privatisation is not being consideredif partnering with private companies is decided on as the way ahead, the Naval Bases would continue to be run by the Naval Base Commander, with the commercial partner helping to provide part of the service.
Assessments are being undertaken of the potential, should partnering go ahead, for a number of civil staff employed at the Naval Bases to be transferred to the companies. It is too early to say what impact each of the options would have on employment at the Naval Bases.
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the names and locations of the shipyards that provide maintenance and support to RN warships and auxiliaries; and how many people are employed at them. 
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 12 December 2001]: Currently, maintenance and support of the Royal Navy Fleet is principally provided by the three Naval Bases and by the privately owned dockyard companies at Rosyth and Devonport and the commercial managers of the Fleet Maintenance and Repair Organisation at Portsmouth. The number of people employed at the Naval Bases and by the commercial companies (derived from our negotiations on overhead rates) are as follows.
13 Dec 2001 : Column: 969W
|Location||Numbers of civilian employees|
|Babcock BES Rosyth||2,360|
|Devonport Management Ltd.||4,000|
|Fleet Support Ltd. Portsmouth||1,070|
|Naval Base Clyde||2,840|
|Naval Base Devonport||1,450|
|Naval Base Portsmouth||1,200|
Work on minor warships and auxiliaries and also on Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels is generally completed. In addition to Babcock BES, DML and FSL, a varying number of commercial shipyards tender for such work, including Forth Esturary Engineering (Leith), Garvel Clyde Ltd. (Greenock), Buckie Shipyard (Buchan), Timbacraft Ltd. (Faslane), Swansea Drydock (South Wales), Milford Haven Shiprepairers (South Wales), Specialist Heavy Engineers Ltd. (Cardiff), Holyhead Marine (Anglesey), John Kearney (Belfast), A & P Holdings (Wallsend and Falmouth), Richards Drydock (Great Yarmouth), Small & Co. (Lowestoft), Camper and Nicholson (Gosport), Hythe Marine Services (Southampton), Manor Marine Ltd. (Portland), Mashford Bros. Ltd. (Plymouth), Penzance Drydock (Penzance) and Appledore Shipbuilders (North Devon). Details of the employment levels within these companies are not held.
Mr. Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many soldiers, sailors and airmen participated in the London celebrations of the Silver Jubilee in 1977. 
Mr. Ingram: From the records accessible within the timescale available, it has been determined that approximately 3,050 soldiers, sailors and airmen participated in the London celebrations of the Silver Jubilee in 1977 on street lining duties, stair lining at St. Paul's Cathedral and two Guards of Honour. In addition, about 340 armed forces personnel were in the procession and there were 10 military bands which consisted of about 450 people.
Mr. Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will ensure that the numbers of armed service personnel participating in the London celebrations of the Golden Jubilee match those for celebrations relating to the Silver Jubilee in 1977. 
Mr. Ingram: The armed forces personnel participating in the London celebrations of the Golden Jubilee will be in sufficient numbers to meet the requirements for the Golden Jubilee celebrations in accordance with the wishes of Her Majesty the Queen. The size and scope of any previous Jubilee celebrations have no bearing on the Golden Jubilee.
Mr. Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many military bands participated in the Silver Jubilee celebrations in 1977; and how many will be available and eligible to participate in the London celebrations of the Golden Jubilee. 
Mr. Ingram: Ten military bands participated in the London celebrations for the Silver Jubilee. Detailed planning for the Golden Jubilee is still on-going. However, I can confirm that a number of military bands will participate in the celebrations.
13 Dec 2001 : Column: 970W
Mr. Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 10 December 2001, Official Report, column 536W, how many soldiers, sailors and airmen will be available to participate in the London celebrations of the Golden Jubilee. 
Mr. Ingram: I have nothing further to add at this stage.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the annual running cost of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight is; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: The cost of running the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight in financial year 200001 was approximately £1.6 million. The flight performs a valuable role in promoting a positive image of the RAF and in reminding current generations of the sacrifices and achievements of those who fought in the Second World War.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his policy is on reducing the number of (1) fixed wing fighter and ground attack aircraft in operational use by the Royal Air Force; and if he will make a statement; 
Mr. Ingram: We keep the numbers and types of platforms in use with all three Services under regular review, to ensure that we have the correct mix of capabilities for the range of tasks we are likely to be called upon to undertake.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) tanks, (b) armoured personnel carriers and (c) armoured fighting vehicles have been owned by the Army in each year from 1985 to 2000; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: Army Equipment Holdings are published within the scope of the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty. Since 1997 these have been set out in an annex to the annual Ministry of Defence Performance Report. For the period 1991 to 1996 this information was published in the Statement of the Defence Estimates (SDE) for each year. Prior to 1991, this information was provided in the SDE but in a different format, based on the force structures at that time. These documents are held in the Libraries of the House.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the (a) number and (b) purpose of the Challenger 2 main battle tanks based in Germany. 
Mr. Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to him on 5 December 2001, Official Report, columns 35657W. Challenger 2 Main Battle Tanks provide the backbone of the armoured capability of the Army. Their purpose is the destruction of enemy armour in the contact battle, but they also have a wider utility across the spectrum of conflict, as has been demonstrated in the Balkans.
13 Dec 2001 : Column: 971W
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|