---

International Organisations

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it his policy to promote the principle that activities of international organisations should be in the interest of all member states, with equal weight given to each vote. [58092]

Mr. Macshane: Within international organisations, HMG seeks to build consensus but when votes are necessary in an organisation, HMG abides by the rules governing voting within that organisation. When these rules are drawn up or amended, government policy is to promote an equitable system of voting.

DEFENCE

Medical Treatment

Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence by what criteria armed forces personnel have been selected for medical treatment in the private sector; and if he will make a statement. [54134]

Mr. Ingram [holding answer 7 May 2002]: In broad terms the criteria used for referral to private healthcare providers under recent and current schemes relates to the likelihood of individuals returning rapidly to full fitness and to the operational priority of their particular role or trade, although the details vary between the different arrangements.

Strategic Sealift Service

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) pursuant to his answer of 24 April, Official Report, column 259W, whether the reimbursement by AWSR Ltd. for Government purchase of two ro-ro vessels built by Harland & Wolff will include interest; [56119] (2) whether guarantees have been given by his Department in respect of the ro-ro vessels being built at Flensburg for AWSR Ltd. as part of the Strategic Sealift Service. [56120]

24 May 2002 : Column 608W

Mr. Ingram: AWSR Shipping Ltd.'s reimbursement of the purchase price of the two Harland and Wolff built vessels will not include interest as the overall PFI arrangement will take the funding of the ships into account. At the time the four shipbuilding contracts were placed with Flensburger of Germany, the department accepted that it would assume responsibility for them in the event of a PFI contract failing to come to fruition.

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 24 April, Official Report, column 259W, what date was estimated by his Department for signature of the contract for the provision of the Strategic Sealift Service when AWSR Ltd. was announced as preferred bidder on 26 October 2000. [56116]

Mr. Ingram: In October 2000 the Ministry of Defence estimated that contract negotiations could be concluded by the spring of 2001.

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, (1) pursuant to his answer of 24 April, Official Report, column 259W, which (a) Government departments and (b) regional and industrial bodies with an interest in the Strategic Sealift Service competition were consulted formally by his Department; on what dates; and on what dates responses to this consultation exercise were received; [56117] (2) pursuant to his answer of 24 April, Official Report, column 259W, what discussion took place with Ministers outside his Department regarding the Strategic Sealift Service prior to 26 October 2000; [56118] (3) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, on what dates after 26 October 2000 (a) he, (b) his Ministers and (c) his officials met (i) AWSR Ltd., (ii) NUMAST and (iii) RMT to discuss the Strategic Sealift Service; and what matters were discussed. [56112]

Mr. Ingram: Ministers have not met with AWSR Shipping Ltd to discuss the strategic sealift service. MOD officials have met them frequently as part of the contract negotiations. My hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence met with representatives of the Seafarers' Unions at their request on 19 July 2001, specifically to discuss matters related to crewing of the strategic sealift service. MOD officials have met with those unions on a number of occasions. Consultation with Government Departments and regional and industrial bodies with an interest in the strategic sealift service competition was not on a formal basis and Ministerial discussions prior to 26 October 2000 were ad hoc. Details could only be gathered at disproportionate cost.

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, (1) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, whether the price quoted by AWSR Ltd. for provision of the Strategic Sealift Service and accepted by him in selecting AWSR as preferred bidder for the contract was based upon using sponsored reserve crews on the six ships when they were in Ministry of Defence use, with British officers and multinational crews when the ships were on commercial work; [56107] (2) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, what the preferred crewing arrangements were of the three unsuccessful shortlisted bidders for the Strategic Sealift Service; [56109]

24 May 2002 : Column 609W

(3) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, when the decision to use British crews at all times on all six vessels provided by AWSR Ltd. was announced; [56108] (4) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, by what percentage the costs of the Strategic Sealift Service will change as a result of the use of British crews on all six vessels at all times. [56110]

Mr. Ingram: AWSR's initial price reflected the arrangements described in my earlier answer. ASWR have not formally announced their intention to man the ships with British crews at all times but they made their negotiated position clear to the Trade Unions by 13 September 2001. The crewing arrangements underlying the unsuccessful bids are a matter for the companies concerned. Details of AWSR's bid costs are commercially sensitive and I am withholding the requested information under Exemption 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, what the cost will be to the Exchequer of the introduction of a tonnage tax regime by AWSR Ltd. in the provision of six vessels for the Strategic Sealift Service; [56111] (2) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, when (a) the Goverment's White Paper, "British Shipping: Charting a New Course" was published and (b) the revised and confirmed best and final offer by AWSR Ltd. for provision of the Strategic Sealift Service was submitted; [56113] (3) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, what commitments to the training and recruitment of new officers and ratings have been given by AWSR Ltd. under the negotiations for the Strategic Sealift Service; [56115] (4) pursuant to his answer of 30 April, Official Report, column 742W, which companies in membership of the consortium selected as preferred bidder for the Strategic Sealift Service (a) participated in the Government's shipping working party and (b) have registered vessels under the tonnage tax. [56114]

Mr. Ingram: The Government White Paper "British Shipping Charting a New Course" was published on 16 December 1998. The associated fiscal support was announced in the Finance Act 2000 and made available from 28 July 2000. Along with all the other bidders in the competition, AWSR Shipping Ltd made their final bid on 6 July 2000. The strategic sealift service proposed by AWSR Shipping Ltd. will create 184 new jobs, all of which will be filled by officers and ratings eligible to be Sponsored Reserves and recruited on the open market. AWSR Shipping Ltd. has assured the Ministry of Defence that it is committed to a level of training that meets the government's British Shipping Policy. Details of AWSR's bid are commercially sensitive and I am therefore withholding details of the costs associated with their tonnage tax position under Exemption 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information. Of the companies making up the AWSR consortium, only James Fisher & Sons plc took part in the Government's shipping working party and only this company has ships registered under tonnage tax.

24 May 2002 : Column 610W

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what alternatives to the Harland and Wolff Ro-Ro contract were considered; what assessment was made of the alternatives; and if he will make a statement. [57353]

Mr. Ingram: Bidders in the strategic sealift competition proposed various means of meeting the Ministry of Defence's requirement. All bids were assessed comparatively in terms of value for money having regard to price, delivery and quality. AWSR Shipping Ltd's bid, which provided for early introduction of the RoRo service through ship construction divided between Harland and Wolff and Flensburger, won on merit. Once the process of evaluation had been completed and the selection made, alternatives to Harland and Wolff were not a consideration.

Eurofighter

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the delays in the delivery of the first Eurofighter and on the cost of these delays. [56694]

Dr. Moonie: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 23 May 2002, Official Report, column 477W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Mr. Smith).

---