|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many SA80s and SA80 A2s have been issued to (a) the Royal Navy, (b) the Royal Marines, (c) the RAF, (d) army armoured regiments, (e) airborne regiments, (f) infantry regiments, (g) the TA and (h) other units; and if he will make a statement. 
24 Jul 2002 : Column 1111W
|MOD unit||SA80 A2||SA80 A1|
|(a) The Royal Navy||131||10,179|
|(b) The Royal Marines||3,713||5,012|
|(c) The RAF||5,437||27,389|
|(d) Armoured regiments||514||6,982|
|(e) Airborne regiments||2,137||(1)|
|(f) Infantry regiments||2,415||32,939|
|(g) The TA(2)||100|||
|(h) Other units (including the TA)||9,522||89,264|
(1) SA80 A1 figures for Airborne troops are included within Infantry regiments figures.
(2) Reserve Training and Mobilisation Centre (RTMC), Chilwell.
Dr. Moonie: I understand that the opportunity costs requested relate to any national health service (NHS) operations or activities which did not take place because of compulsory mobilisation of reserve forces doctors on 16 May. Such details are not held by the Ministry of Defence.
Dr. Moonie: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 30 October 2001, Official Report, column 565W to the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws). On the basis of provisional outturn for 200102, United Kingdom defence spending as a percentage of UK Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in that year is now estimated to be 2.5 per cent.
All the figures are based on cash outturn and include the unprogrammed cost of operations and other additions to the planned budget provided in Supplementary Estimates. They are not therefore comparable to forecasts of future defence spending as a percentage of UK GDP, based on the defence spending plans published in the White Paper "2002 Spending Review: New Public Spending Plans 200306" (Cm 5570).
24 Jul 2002 : Column 1112W
|Financial year||Percentage GDP|
This reflects the defence budget expressed as 'near-cash spending in MOD DEL' in Table 12.1 of the White Paper "2002 Spending Review: New Public Spending Plans 200306" (Cm 5570), which is the most appropriate basis of comparison with forecast GDP. Outturn figures are likely to be higher than these plans, when the costs of operations and any other in-year additions are taken into account, and this would increase the share of GDP represented by defence spending in these years.
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will provide a breakdown of incremental 200203 defence spending announced in the 2002 comprehensive spending review by (a) type of expenditure, (b) country and (c) region of the United Kingdom in which this increase is likely to be spent. 
Dr. Moonie: The 2002 spending review covered the period 200304 to 200506. Additional resources will also be made available during 200203 to enable us to manage the pressure arising from the high levels of activity in which we are currently engaged, but these will not be finalised until later in the year and it is therefore not possible to provide the breakdown requested.
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much of the increase in defence spending announced in the recent comprehensive spending review will be spent on Trident in each year from 200203 to 200506. 
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will provide a breakdown of defence spending in each year since 199798 by each country and region of the United Kingdom in which it was spent. 
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the Future Rapid Effects System and the future of (a) the UK's heavy warfighting capability, (b) the development of lighter forces and (c) the role of the medium force in the UK army. 
Dr. Moonie: In order to meet the full range of security challenges it might encounter in the future, the Army must be able to draw upon a full spectrum of forcesheavy, medium and light. The Strategic Defence Review, with its emphasis on expeditionary forces, recognised the requirement to develop further the capabilities of all our forces for more rapid intervention.
The Future Rapid Effects System (FRES) is intended to balance our capacity to meet the requirement for capable medium forces. We shall continue to develop our heavy and light forces as we anticipate a continuing need for
24 Jul 2002 : Column 1113W
the capabilities they provide. None of the capabilities is discrete. We shall continue to organise our forces for specific operations into force packages tailored to the requirements of the missions, using joint capabilities drawn from across the services.
Dr. Moonie [holding answer 23 July 2002]: My right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Defence and the Social Security Minister announced on 20 July 2000 that changes would be made to the Armed Forces Pension Scheme (AFPS) to allow widows and widowers in receipt of an Attributable Forces Family Pension to retain their pension if they remarry or cohabit. These changes took effect from 31 October 2000. Previously, an attributable widow(er)s' pension was withdrawn on remarriage or cohabitation, although it would have been automatically restored on second widowhood or at the end of a period of cohabitation. Those widows or widowers who had already remarried, and have had their attributable pension withdrawn, were not included in the change. Those in receipt of a War Widows' Pension payable under the Naval, Military and Air Force etc. (Disablement and Death) Service Pensions Order 1983, or a non-attributable widows or widowers' AFPS pension, are also not affected by the change; their pensions will still cease on remarriage or cohabitation.
No further changes to widow(er)s' pensions under the current pension scheme are envisaged, however, the review of the AFPS currently proposes extending the October 2000 change to non-attributable pensions. On current plans, this would only apply to those joining the new scheme.
Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when and where Ministers in his Department have held meetings with Ministers and officials of the Irish Government since 1 June 2000; which Ministers were involved in each meeting; which Irish Government Departments were involved in each meeting; and which Ministers and officials from the Irish Government attended each meeting. 
Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what memorandums of understanding have been signed with the United States Administration since 1 January 1999; on what dates each was signed; where each was signed; and with which Department of the United States Administration each was signed. 
24 Jul 2002 : Column 1114W
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|