|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
31 Oct 2002 : Column 889Wcontinued
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if the anthrax innoculation programme offered to (a) Navy, (b) Army, (c) Air Force and (d) other Ministry of Defence personnel is compulsory; 
Dr. Moonie: In keeping with long-standing medical practice, immunisation against anthrax for the Armed Forces and other Ministry of Defence personnel is voluntary and on the basis of informed consent.
Up to and including September 2002, the period for which most recent figures are available, approximately 46 per cent. of personnel offered immunisation against anthrax had accepted. Broken down by the categories requested this equates to (a) Royal Navy 28 per cent. (b) Army 78 per cent. (c) Royal Air Force 46 per cent. and (d) other Ministry of Defence Personnel 61 per cent. Thus far, immunisation against anthrax has been targeted at a small number of personnel in the most readily deployable units. As approximate proportions of their total strengths, excluding reserves, this equates to (a) Royal Navy, 0.7 per cent. (b) Army 0.4 per cent.; (c) Royal Air Force, 4.5 per cent.; and (d) other Ministry of Defence personnel 0.2 per cent.. Information concerning individuals' current anthrax immunisation status is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Earlier this year we announced a decision to expand the programme so that all service personnel, including reserves, and those essential civilians who are likely to deploy on operations are routinely offered immunisation against anthrax. We plan to expand the programme gradually over the next few years, beginning with those units that are held at the highest readiness. I refer the hon. Member to the answer my hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence gave on 13 June 2002, Official Report, columns 134344 to the hon. Member for High Peak (Mr. Levitt).
The United Kingdom has arms embargoes in place in respect of the following countries pursuant to European Union sanctions: Bosnia/Herzegovina; Libya; Burma; Sudan; China (not full scope); the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe.
The United Kingdom has arms embargoes in place in respect of Armenia and Azerbaijan pursuant to Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe sanctions. There is also a unilateral arms embargo in place in respect of Iran (not full scope).
31 Oct 2002 : Column 890W
Although the scope of the embargo varies from country to country depending on the wording of the source instrument, arms embargoes are in general implemented in the UK by prohibiting the export of goods and technology on the Military List. The Military List forms Part III of the Export of Goods (control) Order 1994 as amended.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what measures are in place to ensure that arms and arms components sold abroad are not acquired by (a) countries and (b) organisations outside the UK to whom sale of arms and arms components is prohibited. 
Exports of arms and other goods controlled for strategic reasons are subject to export licences issued by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. All individual licence applications are assessed against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Exporting Licensing Criteria. Criterion 1A of the consolidated criteria makes clear that the Government will not issue a licence if approval would be inconsistent with the UK's international obligations and its commitments to enforce UN, OSCE and EU arms embargoes, as well as national embargoes observed by the UK.
The Government focus their efforts on assessment of potential end-use at the export licensing stage. This includes checks made by our posts overseas where necessary. Carrying out effective risk assessment on end-users before making the export licensing decision is the surest way of preventing arms from falling into the wrong hands. In addition the Government remain committed to carrying out end-use monitoring of exports in those circumstances where this will genuinely add value to our efforts to minimise the risk of misuse and diversion and where such monitoring is practicable. Our overseas posts have standing instructions to report on allegations of misuse of any UK-origin defence equipment. We take these reports into account in our assessment.
Officials from across Whitehall co-operate to pursue possible breaches of sanctions in the UK and abroad. Breaches involving the sale of UK arms and components sold abroad are thoroughly investigated by the relevant authorities.
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the statement by the Minister of State for the Armed Forces on 17 October 2002, Official Report, column 570, when the letter to the hon. Member for North Essex on the relationship between NATO and the European Security and Defence Policy will be sent; and if he will place a copy in the Library. 
31 Oct 2002 : Column 891W
Dr. Moonie: Although preparations have not been concluded, the intention is for the Government and Armed Forces to be represented at ministerial and senior officer level at parades and services in Normandy being organised by the French Comité du Debarquement. The Army will provide a band. Appropriate representation will also be provided at a service of remembrance and thanksgiving which will take place at St. Paul's Cathedral.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many doctors were serving in (a) the RAF, (b) the Army and (c) the Royal Navy in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his Department's policy is on the question raised in the note by Mr. M Barnier to members of Convention, CONV 264/02, as to whether an undertaking of collective defence should be enshrined in the Treaty on European Union. 
Mr. Hoon: The Government's policy, and the policy to which the EU collectively committed itself at the European Council of Nice in December 2000, is that NATO remains the basis for the collective defence of its members.
Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the effect of enlargement on military contributions to the EU designated peacemaking and peacekeeping forces. 
Mr. Hoon: All the countries which are candidates for accession to the EU have made offers of contributions, with a view to their participation in EU-led operations. These countries could already offer forces to an EU-led operation, if invited to take part. When a country joins the EU, it simply removes the need for a formal invitation for that country to take part in EU-led operations.
Procedurally, there is also a change. The offers from member states are recorded in the Helsinki Force Catalogue; those of accession candidates in a supplement to the catalogue. This catalogue identifies the pool of capabilities, meeting commonly-agreed
31 Oct 2002 : Column 892W
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the definitions of (a) European Security and Defence Policy and (b) European Security and Defence Identity. 
Sir John Stanley: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the restrictions imposed by the Spanish Government on the movements of NATO military aircraft and warships in the vicinity of Gibraltar and in transit between Spain and Gibraltar; and what steps have recently been taken by the UK Government to have these restrictions lifted. 
Mr. Ingram: NATO Standardised Agreement (STANAG) 1100, sets out the procedures for visits to NATO and non-NATO ports by naval ships of NATO nations. This Agreement contains a reservation, inserted by the Spanish Government, which prevents visits by NATO ships to or from Gibraltar directly to or from Spanish ports. Any request by military aircraft from NATO (or other) nations, which has Gibraltar as a departure or arrival airfield, to overfly or land in Spain is routinely denied by Spanish authorities. We understand that NATO has no plans specifically to discuss the restrictions imposed by Spain on NATO ships and aircraft. Discussions between the British and Spanish Government in the context of the Brussels Process aim to resolve all outstanding issues between the United Kingdom and Spain over Gibraltar.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|