| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Jan 2003 : Column 63W—continued
Dstl Staff
Sue Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate the cost of recruiting and training replacements from Dstl staff in Farnborough who are unwilling or unable to relocate to Portsdown Main. [89813]
Dr. Moonie: Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) at Farnborough are scheduled to move to Portsdown in late 2006. At this stage it is not possible to predict whether any particular member of staff will leave Dstl rather than move to the new site.
Dstl currently has a low annual turnover of staff and has an effective recruitment and training strategy. Dstl always looks to develop the talents and capabilities of existing staff and would look to existing staff to fill any vacancies at a more senior level, at the same time continuing to recruit and train staff to fill in behind them. Dstl does not therefore envisage a significant increase in such costs attributable to their relocation plans.
Dstl annually recruits in the region of 100 graduates and indicators suggest it is an employer of choice for science graduates.
Sue Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the account taken of the views of Dstl staff at the Farnborough site in arriving at the decision to relocate Farnborough staff to Porstdown Main. [89833]
Dr. Moonie: The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) has been and remains keen to work with staff and trade unions to reduce the impact on staff of their relocation plans. Discussions with TUs have been open and constructive.
Dstl has completed a formal consultation with TUs together with a series of seminars for staff where the relocation plans were explained and staff feedback requested. These responses were used to inform the series of decisions needed on how best to structure the laboratory in the future. Some suggestions from staff have led to changes to plans, including decisions to move staff to different sites than originally planned.
Throughout, staff have been encouraged to express their views on Dstl relocation plans. Many have contacted the chief executive directly with questions, to which he has responded personally. CE/Dstl has also
20 Jan 2003 : Column 64W
given a series of presentations to staff, including question and answer sessions, at sites affected by these plans.
FA2 Sea Harrier
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the current capability of the FA2 Sea Harrier for possible combat in the Middle East. [89882]
Mr. Hoon: No decision has been taken to authorise military action against Iraq. As I told the House in the course of my statement on 7 January 2003, Official Report, column 37, HMS Ark Royal is deploying in a helicopter carrier role and is therefore not currently carrying any Sea Harriers.
Firefighters' Dispute
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) Royal Naval and (b) other service personnel are on duties associated with the national firefighters' dispute; and if a schedule has been set for their return to normal military duties. [91307]
Mr. Ingram: Approximately 19,000 military personnel are available for duties associated with the firefighters' strike. Of these, approximately 3,000 are drawn from the Royal Navy and are employed in both the firefighting and support roles.
The armed forces role during strike periods has been and will continue to be to provide emergency cover, thus seeking to save lives and ensuring that essential services are maintained. Emergency cover will, as far as possible, be maintained for as long as the strike continues and balanced with other demands on military resources.
FIST Project
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made in the development of the FIST project; and what advantages it will offer to infantry soldiers. [84850]
Mr. Ingram: The final stage of a competition to choose a Prime Contractor for the Assessment Phase of the Future Integrated Soldier Technology (FIST) programme is currently underway, involving BAE Systems Ltd. and Thales Optronics Ltd. Selection of a single Prime Contractor is planned for early 2003.
The FIST programme will bring the benefits of enhanced technology to the infantry soldier by providing an integrated suite of equipment. The programme will enhance the mission effectiveness of those soldiers committed to dismounted close combat,
20 Jan 2003 : Column 65W
particularly in the areas of command and control of information, lethality, mobility, survivability and sustainability.
HMS Albion
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when HMS Albion is expected to become available for operational tasking. [91222]
Mr. Ingram: On current plans, HMS Albion is expected to enter service with the Royal Navy by July 2003. Following operational training, she should be available for tasking in October 2003.
HMS Nottingham
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if changes have been made to the anticipated (a) repair costs and (b) time out of service for HMS Nottingham since she arrived in the United Kingdom for repairs. [91279]
Mr. Ingram: There have been no changes to the anticipated repair costs and time out of service for HMS Nottingham since she arrived in the United Kingdom for repair.
HMS Sceptre
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the final nuclear safety justification for HMS Sceptre will take place; and when he expects the submarine to be fully operational. [91032]
Mr. Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 15 January, Official Report, column 638W. The final nuclear safety justification is planned for February 2003. This should permit HMS Sceptre's reactor to be powered up and tested prior to the submarine going to sea for the usual post refit trials and training before she returns to operations.
HMS Trafalgar
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) when HMS Trafalgar is to return to operational service; [91218]
- (2) if he will make a statement about the damage caused to HMS Trafalgar. [91227]
Mr. Ingram: The damage to HMS Trafalgar, following her grounding on 6 November 2002, is centred around her forward sonar.
Surveys to fully scope the damage and assess the necessary repairs are currently being undertaken in Devonport dockyard. These include survey of the forward sonar (the damaged area), a full structural assessment of the forward main ballast tanks, foreplane operating gear, anchor operating gear and associated faired coverings. The surveys are expected to complete by the end of January 2003.
The opportunity is being taken to combine the repairs with a planned routine maintenance period for the submarine. The overall work programme, which will be informed by the surveys, is expected to take until early
20 Jan 2003 : Column 66W
2004 to complete. The submarine will then undergo the normal trials and training requirements before returning to the fleet.
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the outcome will be known of the boards of inquiry into the accidents involving (a) HMS Trafalgar and (b) HMS Nottingham. [91219]
Mr. Ingram: Boards of Inquiry (BOI) into the accidents involving HMS Trafalgar and HMS Nottingham are complete.
There are no plans to publish the BOI reports into incidents of this nature.
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 13 January, Official Report, column 403W to the hon. Member for Batley and Spen (Mr. Wood).
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what effect on the overall capability of the submarine fleet has been caused by the withdrawal of HMS Trafalgar for repairs. [91228]
Mr. Ingram: HMS Trafalgar was due to enter a period of extended maintenance in April 2003. Her withdrawal from service in November 2002 has therefore not had a significant effect on the overall capability of the submarine fleet.
Low-level Flying (Taunton)
Mr. Flook: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many complaints he has received in each of the last 24 months about (a) the RAF and (b) the USAF and US Navy low flying jet fighters on training runs flying over the Taunton constituency. [83340]
Dr. Moonie: The current system of recording complaints about low flying does not include the constituency within which the complainant resides. The nationality of aircraft involved in complaints is not routinely recorded, nor is it envisaged that it should be. The hon. Member may wish to be aware that in the last 24 months the number of individual complaints recorded by the Ministry of Defence Low Flying Complaints and Enquiries unit for all low flying military aircraft in the county of Somerset was as follows:
20 Jan 2003 : Column 67W
Complaints have been recorded by the address given by the complainant. Details of the pattern of military low flying activity by low flying area are included on the Ministry of Defence website under the address www.lowflying.mod.uk.
Mr. Flook: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the ordnance survey co-ordinates for low-level jet fighters training run routes over the Taunton constituency. [83341]
Dr. Moonie: There are no "training run routes" for low level jet fighters across the Taunton constituency; as part of their training, aircrew are instructed and encouraged to constantly vary their routes in order to maintain the training value. In common with the rest of the United Kingdom, the whole of the Taunton constituency is open to low flying training by military aircraft in order to spread the disturbance as thinly as possible. However, a number of areas are excluded, such as restricted airspace around civil aerodromes, glider sites, certain industrial sites and the larger centres of population (generally towns with over 10,000 inhabitants).
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |