| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Jun 2003 : Column 520W—continued
Military Flying Training System
Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much money has been allocated by his Department for the Military Flying Training System programme; how much he expects this programme to cost; and when he expects to be able to make a full financial commitment. [119184]
Mr. Ingram: Funding is allocated for in-year expenditure only. Provision for future years' expenditure is made in the annually revised Equipment Plan. In the case of the United Kingdom Military Flying Training System, the allocation for equipment acquisition for 2003–04 is £9.5 million. The total estimated cost of the programme is some £12.5 billion. The MFTS programme is currently in its assessment phase. Subject to the necessary Main Gate approval, the project is currently planned to proceed to its next phase in 2006. Full financial commitment will not be made until after Main Gate approval.
Missile Defence
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Active Layered Tactical Ballistic Missile Defence study relating to Missile Defence has been completed; and if he will make a statement. [119502]
Mr. Ingram: The main body of work to inform the NATO Active Layered Tactical Ballistic Missile Defence (ALTBMD) Feasibility Study has been completed. The NATO authorities are currently compiling a report that will be made available to member nations in due course. The report will form part of a continuing process whose aim is the production of a NATO Staff Requirement for ALTBMD. We currently expect this requirement to be finalised in 2004.
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his written ministerial statement of 12 June 2003, Official Report, column 57WS, on missile defence, what assessment he has made of the compatibility of the Government's support for the US missile defence system with the UK's commitments under Article VI of the Non Proliferation Treaty. [120323]
Mr. Ingram: The United Kingdom involvement in cooperative work with the United States on missile defence, including the use of RAF Fylingdales for missile defence purposes, is entirely compatible with the UK's commitments under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The US missile defence system is not a nuclear weapon system.
The UK is wholly committed to its obligations under the NPT, including Article VI. I set out the progress the UK has made in fulfilling its NPT obligations on nuclear disarmament in my answer of 12 June 2003, Official Report, columns 1018–19W to my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Alan Simpson).
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his written ministerial statement of 12 June 2003, Official Report, column 57WS, on missile defence, whether missiles will be sited in the UK as part of the US missile defence system; and if he will make a statement. [120324]
20 Jun 2003 : Column 521W
Mr. Ingram: The Government have taken no decision about the acquisition or deployment of a missile defence system. The United States has not made any request to site interceptor missiles in the United Kingdom as part of its missile defence system.
NATO
Mr. Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the objectives are of Government policy towards NATO. [120501]
Mr. Hoon: NATO remains the cornerstone of the United Kingdom's defence policy. Our strong support for the alliance is based on the collective defence it provides and its continuing contribution to a stable and secure European continent. The decisions taken at the Prague Summit on NATO enlargement, capabilities and the transformation agenda successfully reaffirmed the alliance as the key security and defence organisation. At Foreign and Defence Ministers meetings earlier this month, agreement on the NATO Response Force and the new Command Arrangements underlined allies' determination to deliver the capabilities needed to ensure NATO's relevance in today's security environment.
Nuclear Weapons
Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the effect on UK collaboration with the US nuclear weapons programme will be of US plans to resume underground nuclear weapons tests. [119078]
Mr. Caplin: I am not aware that the United States has any plans to resume nuclear-weapon-test-explosions.
Pilots
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin) on 21 January 2003, Official Report, column 209W, and his answer of 3 June 2003, Official Report, column 299W, on pilots, what factors have brought about the change in numbers in that period; and if he will make a statement. [120322]
Mr. Caplin: The increase in the strength of pilots for the Sea Harrier fleet was due to the graduation of three pilots from the Sea Harrier Operational Flying Training (SHAR OFT) course and one pilot, previously listed as very seriously injured, now being included in the trained strength.
The decrease in the strength of pilots for the frontline Harrier GR7 fleet was due to Officers being posted to Qualified Weapons Instructor Courses (QWIC); or to be Qualified Flying Instructors, training students for the frontline. Postings, promotions and retirement from Service are also factors. Three RAF officers will be returning from the QWIC on 20 June 2003, and a further three RAF officers will graduate from training in July 2003.
Balanced against the influx of RN Harrier pilots to join the Joint Force Harrier and routine postings out, it is expected that the strength will match the requirement in July 2003.
20 Jun 2003 : Column 522W
Such fluctuations should be expected as part of the dynamic personnel management process.
President Bush
Mr. Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the costs associated with the recent visit of President Bush to Northern Ireland were to his Department. [120363]
Mr. Ingram: There were no additional costs to the Ministry of Defence regarding the recent visit of the President of the United States of America to Northern Ireland. Fuel and other items used by the visitors were either paid for at the time of the visit or are being recovered from the United States Air Force.
Schools Funding
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he assists in the funding of schools attended by children of Service personnel (a) on an annual basis and (b) to help with financial shortfalls caused by falling school rolls arising from delays in transferring regiments; and if he will make a statement. [120354]
Mr. Caplin: I am aware that changes to unit deployments in the hon. Member's constituency, especially those connected with operations in Iraq, have affected school numbers and funding. Our local schools liaison officer recently attended a meeting of headteachers to explain the reasons for these changes. Funding for schools is the responsibility of the Department for Education and Skills and Devolved Administrations. However, we aim to maintain close liaison with local education authorities and schools to help resolve problems and give early notification to assist in planning. I regret that it was not possible on this occasion to give the customary advance notice.
Service Manning
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his answer of 4 June 2003, Official Report, column 454W, on service manning targets, if he will list the (a) spending targets and (b) spending estimates for the current financial year on (i) personnel and (ii) manpower overheads in each of the Services; and if he will make a statement. [119449]
Mr. Caplin [holding answer 19 June 2003]: The Department does not have spending targets for personnel or manpower overheads (but spending plans which form part of the Main Supply Estimates each year). At this early stage of the financial year, spending estimates for the year will be the same as the plans.
The estimated costs of employing Service personnel for 2003–04 are shown in the table.
| (£ million) | |
|---|---|
| Navy | 1,607 |
| Army | 4,181 |
| RAF | 2,029 |
We do not collect centrally the costs of manpower overheads for Service personnel. The costs of recruiting
20 Jun 2003 : Column 523W
and training Service personnel are lodged with the military manpower Top Level Budgets. Their net resource costs for 2003–04 are as follows:
| (£ million) | |
|---|---|
| Navy | 694 |
| Army | 1,681 |
| RAF | 1,018 |
Spending plans for Service personnel and associated overheads are at a level consistent with enabling the manning targets set out in the current Public Service Agreement to be met.
Special Commissions
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, (1) how many (a) requests have been received by DESO from UK companies for special commissions to be paid on sale of defence equipment since 1990 and (b) special commissions that DESO has approved since 1990; and if he will list (i) the countries in which these special commissions were to be paid and (ii) the amount to be paid; [108991]
- (2) in which year the requirement was introduced for UK companies to seek permission from DESO in order to make special commissions on defence equipment sales. [108990]
Mr. Ingram: I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |