| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Naval Deployments
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which Royal Navy ships have been deployed for periods exceeding five months in each of the past four years. [26680]
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 11 January 2002]: Following is a list of Royal Navy ships which have been deployed for periods exceeding five months in each of the past four years. It is standard practice to deploy ships for six month periods.
14 Jan 2002 : Column 57W
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of Royal Naval personnel are involved in operations. [26681]
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 11 January 2002]: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws) on 10 December 2001, Official Report, columns 531–32W.
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which Royal Navy ships have been away from their base port in excess of 60 per cent. of the time, averaged over the past two years. [26675]
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 11 January 2002]: Over the past two years, two ships have been deployed from their home bases for an average of more than 60 per cent. of the time. HMS Triumph, was deployed from her home base at Devonport for an average of 68 per cent. of the time; and HMS Lancaster was deployed from her home base at Portsmouth for an average of 64 per cent. of the time over the past two years.
Ptarmigan System
Mr. Swayne: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement outlining the extent to which the deficiencies in the Ptarmigan communications system impairs the operational effectiveness of the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps. [23775]
Mr. Ingram: The Ptarmigan system has supported successful operations by the ARRC during recent deployments to Bosnia and Kosovo. However, if advances in modern computing and communications technology are to be fully utilised by our forces, we recognise that Ptarmigan does not offer, in the longer term, the most effective solution. Therefore, plans are in place to replace Ptarmigan through Project Falcon from 2006 onwards. I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Dr. Moonie) on 9 January 2002, Official Report, column 829W, for evidence of our continuing commitment to maximising the ARRC's operational effectiveness through the full range of modern and robust communications systems.
14 Jan 2002 : Column 58W
Export Licences
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many 680 approvals have been given each year since 1 May 1997; how many have led to export licence applications; and how many such licences have been approved. [25733]
Dr. Moonie: The F680 process is an informal process under which companies can obtain advice on the prospects for approval of exports at the marketing stage. The F680 also gives formal clearance for release of classified information, where required, for marketing purposes. The number of clearances for each of the years for which data are held, is as follows:
| Year | F680s cleared |
|---|---|
| 1999 | 1,736 |
| 2000 | 1,847 |
| 2001 | 2,042 |
It is not possible to correlate data about F680 clearances with data relating to the export licensing process since the processes are quite separate. For example, F680s may be seeking advice in general terms about marketing prospects which may relate partially to the export that is eventually licensed. It is routinely made clear to exporters that advice in response to F680 applications does not prejudge a decision on the eventual consideration of an export licence application.
RAF Deployments
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of personnel have exceeded 140 nights away from home, in the most recent 12-month period for which figures are available, in (a) 33 Squadron, (b) 10 Squadron, (c) 101 Squadron, (d) 24 Squadron, (e) 30 Squadron, (f) 47 Squadron, (g) 70 Squadron, (h) 7 Squadron, (i) 18 Squadron and (j) 27 Squadron. [26678]
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 11 January 2002]: The RAF Separated Service Recording System records periods of absence of three days or more. The table shows the percentage of RAF personnel on each squadron who have exceeded 140 days away from home on separated service in the 12-month period ending 30 September 2001.
14 Jan 2002 : Column 59W
| Squadron | Operational/routine tasks | All reasons(15) |
|---|---|---|
| 33 | 4.4 | 14.9 |
| 10 | 1.6 | 7.6 |
| 101 | 1.8 | 11.3 |
| 24 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| 47 | 3.8 | 3.8 |
| 70 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
| 7 | 1.6 | 5.9 |
| 18 | 2.5 | 6.8 |
| 27 | 1.4 | 5.1 |
(15) Includes absences due to normal career development training, resettlement and expedition training, sport and permanent detachments from parent unit.
RAF commitments are regularly reviewed and adjusted as soon as circumstances allow. Operational deployments continue only for as long as is necessary to meet agreed objectives.
Defence Contracts
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what contractual safeguards are in place in the event of a company winning a Ministry of Defence contract going bankrupt; and if he will make a statement. [25869]
Dr. Moonie: In the event of various circumstances of insolvency or bankruptcy such as the appointment of an administrative receiver, or a receiver, or a company being wound up, the Ministry of Defence has the right to terminate the contract without recompense to the contractor. This is achieved by the terms of DEFCON 515 (Bankruptcy and Insolvency) which is included in all MOD headquarters contracts. The most effective means of dealing with this issue is to have a system that reduces the risk of placing contracts with suppliers of limited financial capability. The MOD employs such a system, but that risk cannot be entirely eliminated.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |