---

28 Jan 2003 : Column 834W—continued

Health Care

Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many soldiers when last questioned indicated that they were (a) unsatisfied and (b) satisfied with (i) military health care, (ii) waiting lists, (iii) remedial treatment and (iv) health care for their family; what percentage of respondents this represents; and if he will make a statement. [92146]

Dr. Moonie: Continuous Attitude Surveys (CAS) do not ask how satisfied or dissatisfied soldiers are with Military Healthcare per se. Instead, more specific questions are asked eg relating to waiting lists, remedial treatment and healthcare for the family. Responses given in the CAS published in August 2002 were as follows.

28 Jan 2003 : Column 835W

	Satisfied		Neutral		Dissatisfied
	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage
Waiting lists
Officers	152	43	79	23	119	34
Soldiers	720	50	419	29	297	21
Remedial treatment
Officers	162	47	71	21	112	32
Soldiers	703	50	433	31	273	19
Healthcare for family
Officers	49	19	86	34	118	47
Soldiers	315	30	430	42	290	28

Housing Stock

David Hamilton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much investment was made by his Department in housing stock in 2002 in (a) the United Kingdom and (b) other countries, broken down by country. [93309]

Dr. Moonie: The investment made in housing stock has been interpreted to mean expenditure on service family accommodation upgrades and new build, falling within the capital departmental expenditure limit (DEL), which for financial year 2001–02 outturn was as follows:

Country	Outturn for FY 2001–02 (£ million)
United Kingdom	27.162
Germany	0.481
Gibraltar	1.497
Cyprus	10.771

The figure for the UK excludes some £54 million, which falls within the resource DEL, which was spent by the Defence Housing Executive on its upgrade programme. Details of expenditure in financial year 2002–03 are not currently available.

Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many empty homes his Department (a) had five years ago and (b) has now, by region; if he will establish an empty homes strategy within his Department; and if he will set a target for reduction in empty homes. [92916]

Dr. Moonie: On 1 April 1998 the Defence Housing Executive (DHE) had 13,235 vacant properties. By 1 April 2002 the numbers of voids had reduced to 8,852. A breakdown, by DHE region, follows:

	1998	2002
Eastern	2,920	1,762
Western	1,421	1,176
South East Central	1,492	1,312
South East North	2,094	743
South East South	1,605	1,369
South West	2,480	1,785
Scotland	1,223	705
Total	13,235	8,852

To provide timely accommodation for service personnel and to allow for the high mobility of service life, DHE's long-term strategy is to operate with a management margin of no more than 10 per cent. of vacant properties. The welfare of military personnel and their families is paramount: requiring families to move mid-tour to facilitate property disposals is unpopular and could ultimately affect morale and retention. Maintaining a reasonable management margin allows DHE to keep these moves to a minimum. Unlike the situation with many other housing providers, turnover of occupants is generally high, and it would be inappropriate to keep void rates very low by using waiting lists and temporary accommodation such as bed and breakfast.

One of the key targets set for DHE is to reduce the management margin progressively towards 10 per cent. by November 2005. A policy of continuous review of all quarters has secured the disposal of nearly 11,000 properties in the last three years. In accordance with wider Government policy, properties that are temporarily surplus but held for known future deployments are offered to registered social landlords, local authorities, and more recently to key workers from the fire, police, prison, NHS, and education services.

28 Jan 2003 : Column 836W

International Criminal Court

Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the impact of the UK's ratification of the Statute of the International Criminal Court on UK forces' scope for action in the event of any military intervention in Iraq. [92891]

Mr. Ingram: The offences contained in the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reflect international law provisions that were already applicable to the conduct of United Kingdom forces in any theatre of engagement. The ICC Statute does not therefore impose new conditions.

The consequences for our forces of UK ratification of the ICC Statute were carefully examined in preparation for the ICC Act 2001. Under the Statute, investigation and, if necessary prosecution of any allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide by a UK national would be carried out by the UK. The Court would intervene only if it determined that a state was unwilling or unable to pursue a particular case, but it is inconceivable that the UK would ever be unable or unwilling to investigate or take appropriate action.

28 Jan 2003 : Column 837W

Iraq

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the number of Iraqi civilian casualties that could arise from a war against Iraq. [91967]

Mr. Ingram: No decision on military action in Iraq has been taken. In any military action it is our policy, consistent with international law, to avoid civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure wherever possible, and to minimise them where they cannot be avoided.

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with (a) France and (b) Germany on (i) co-operation in military action against Iraq and (ii) a European Union military force against Iraq. [92926]

Mr. Hoon: There has been no decision to take military action against Iraq. I have not discussed with my French or German colleagues bilateral co-operation, or any European Security and Defence Policy operation, in that context. Military action in Iraq is neither imminent nor inevitable.

Mr. Lyons: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether British troops have been given orders in relation to protection of oil fields in Iraq. [93105]

Mr. Hoon: No decision has been taken to commit British forces to military action against Iraq. It would not be appropriate to comment on any tasks that might be undertaken by our forces in the event of military operations.

MOD Police

Mr. Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Ministry of Defence police officers will be surplus to requirement at (a) Salisbury Plain Army Training Estate, (b) Boscombe Down and (c) DSTL Porton Down when Landmarc Support Services commence their strategic partnership; and if he will make a statement. [93483]

Dr. Moonie: Ministry of Defence police (MDP) numbers are kept under constant review. However, there will be no reduction of MDP personnel in the Salisbury Plain area when Landmarc Support Services undertake the contract to provide assistance with the upkeep of the Army Training Estate.

Naval Helicopters

Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on (a) the current and (b) the future projected roles of the Royal Navy's (i) Merlin, (ii) Sea King and (iii) Lynx helicopters. [92898]

Mr. Ingram: The Royal Navy's Merlin Mark 1 helicopters provide an advanced anti-submarine search and attack capability, as well as wider utility in surface surveillance, Search and Rescue (SAR) and support

28 Jan 2003 : Column 838W

roles. Merlin achieved its Initial Operating Capability deployed in HMS Ark Royal in June 2002, and has completed a successful embarkation in the Type 23 Frigate, HMS Lancaster. It will provide a crucial component of both open ocean and littoral operations for the foreseeable future.

The Sea King has provided the backbone of the Royal Navy's anti-submarine capability over the last three decades, but is being progressively withdrawn from service as Merlin becomes operational. The Sea King Airborne Early Warning Mark 2 has been upgraded to Mark 7 to provide enhanced airborne surveillance and control for air defence into the next decade. The Sea King Mark 4, supplemented by the conversion of some Mark 6 aircraft, will continue to provide a support helicopter capability, primarily for three Commando Brigade Royal Marines, until the turn of the decade. The Sea King Mark 5 will provide a SAR capability well into the next decade.

Lynx Mark 3 and Mark 8 aircraft provide surveillance and attack capability from assigned frigates and destroyers. This includes surface surveillance and targeting, anti-surface and anti-submarine weapon delivery, and battle damage assessment, as well as key elements of frigates' and destroyers' SAR, humanitarian support and constabulary capabilities. The Surface Combatant Maritime Rotorcraft (SCMR) will be phased into service during the second half of the decade to succeed and enhance the capability currently provided by the Lynx Mark 3 and Mark 8 helicopters.

---