|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
15 Oct 2002 : Column 537Wcontinued
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the objectives are of the Criminal Justice Web Site; what steps he has taken to publicise its launch; how many media outlets reported the event; and how many hits were made in the first month. 
Each criminal justice agency is responsible for promoting the website within its own organisation and amongst its contacts and partners. In addition, the Northern Ireland Office issued a press release to all the main local media outlets on 2 August 2002.
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what (a) instructions were drawn up for and (b) safeguards were used by PSNI officers in the Newtownabbey area to protect against right to privacy violations in the use of DNA analysis to re-examine
15 Oct 2002 : Column 538W
forensic evidence collected in unresolved murder investigations; what the results were of these examinations; and what his assessment is of this experiment. 
Jane Kennedy: The Police in Newtownabbey are conducting a self-inspection of unresolved murders applying forensic technology, including DNA, as appropriate. Any DNA results obtained will be examined against the DNA database. The management of the DNA database is governed by legislation, including the European Convention on Human Rights.
Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many staff were seconded between (a) BP, (b) Shell, (c) Enron, (d) Exxon-Mobil, (e) Conoco, (f) Texaco and (g) TotalFinaElf and his Department in (i) 19992000, (ii) 200001 and (iii) April 2001 to the latest date for which figures are available. 
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what deployments include the use of private military companies' services (a) in Britain and (b) abroad; what the additional cost is of using mercenary troops rather than British troops; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: The Green Paper entitled Private Military Companies: Options for Regulation published on 12 February 2002, highlights the problem of defining a private military company. It notes that their services may include provision of forces for combat, but much more usually, services such as advice, training, logistic support, supply of personnel for monitoring roles, and de-mining operations. In practice, a wide spectrum of people and companies may be involved in the supply of military and security services.
The Ministry of Defence does not employ commercial contractors to provide forces for combat or armed guards. The MOD does, however, utilise the services of commercial contractors where appropriate and cost effective in a number of areas on deployments both in the United Kingdom and abroad.
Contracted services are primarily in the areas of logistic support services, e.g. provision of accommodation, catering and maintenance. We also employ local host nation support (e.g. for food supplies
15 Oct 2002 : Column 539W
and locally employed cleaning and interpreters). Similarly commercial contractors may also be employed to provide advice, support, training and maintenance on equipment supplied to the forces.
Such services are provided on the majority of UK deployments in some form, and are contracted separately by individual commands. This information is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans the Government have to use private military companies' services; in which sectors of the armed forces these will be used; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Adam Ingram: The Government has no plans to engage the services of commercial contractors to provide forces for combat, but will continue to use commercial contractors to provide a range of services, both in the United Kingdom and overseas, wherever it is appropriate and cost effective to do so.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many private military companies he estimates exist in the UK; and how many UK nationals he estimates are employed by these companies. 
Mr. Ingram: The Green Paper entitled Private Military Companies: Options for Regulation published on 12 February 2002, highlights the problem of defining a private military company. In practice, a wide spectrum of people and companies may be involved in the supply of military and security services.
15 Oct 2002 : Column 540W
The Paper notes that services of private military companies may include provision of forces for combat, but much more usually, services such as advice, training, logistic support, supply of personnel for monitoring roles, and de-mining operations.
Given this wide range of activities combined with the definitional problems, there are numerous sectors of industry that could potentially provide such services. It is therefore not possible to make such an estimate.
Mr. Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the (a) Army, (b) Royal Navy and (c) RAF budgets were for medical provisions in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. 
Dr. Moonie [holding answer 22 May 2002]: The costs of the Defence Medical Services (DMS) in the years for which figures are available are shown in the table below. Information for the years 19921993 to 19971998 is reproduced from the House of Commons Defence Committee (HCDC) Seventh report ''The Strategic Defence Review: Defence Medical Services'' published on 27 October 1999. The final outturn for 19981999 shown in the table was the same as the estimated figure contained in the HCDC Report. For the years 19992000 onwards, we have obtained figures from Surgeon General's Department (SGD) (covering SGD and the four medical agencies), single Service Medical Directorates General, HQ British Forces Germany, the Institute of Naval Medicine and the Centre for Aviation Medicine. The budgets for primary care have been disaggregated down to unit level and these figures could therefore only be provided at disproportionate cost. Some historical figures cannot be provided as contemporary records are no longer available.
|#M COST OF DMS||N/A||N/A||330.6||333.0||257.7||273.5||291.5||320.16||332.88||348.89|
1. Expenditure for 19921993 and 19931994 cannot be provided since figures ceased to be published in the Statement on the Defence Estimates after 1991 when budgets were disaggregated and contemporary records are no longer available.
2. Figures for 19941995 and 19951996 are the cost of the DMS estimated by Defence Cost Study 15(DCS15). The figures contained in the DCS15 report included primary care costs, estimated at #83.5 million for 19941995 and #81.1 million for 19951996. These have been removed here to allow accurate comparison with the figures for the subsequent years.
3. Figures for 19961997 to 20012002 comprise the costs of the Surgeon General's Department and the four medical agencies (the Defence Secondary Care Agency, Defence Dental Agency, the Medical Supplies Agency and the Defence Medical Training Organisation), the single Service Medical Directorates General, the Institute of Naval Medicine, the Centre for Aviation Medicine and British Forces Germany. Except for British Forces Germany, the figures exclude primary care costs. Figures for Germany cover secondary care for Army and RAF personnel and primary care for Army personnel from 19961997 to 20002001 and both Army and remaining RAF personnel in 20012002.
4. Except where advised above, primary care costs cannot be provided without disproportionate effort as they are disaggregated and are embedded in individual units' budgets.
5. It should be noted that although the Ministry of Defence has changed accounting systems to include full Resource Accounts in financial year 20012002 (which include costs of fixed assets etc, not reported previously), the figures contained in the table have been adjusted to allow comparison with the previous years.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|