| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
8 Jul 2003 : Column 697W—continued
Challenger 2 Tank
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Challenger 2 tanks are operated by each armoured regiment; and what reserve is held (a) centrally and (b) by regiments. [123546]
Mr. Ingram: Each armoured regiment is organised around an establishment of 58 Challenger II Main Battle Tanks. Each regiment, however, normally holds 44 tanks. This allows the balance of the fleet to be distributed for other tasks such as: individual training, collective training, repair programmes, trials work, etc. Nonetheless, regiments committed to operations or undertaking training may be augmented up to the full establishment of 58 tanks, dependent on the situation, or the nature of the training/operation being undertaken.
In addition, some tanks are held at the Defence Supply and Distribution Agency depot at Ashchurch. The number held there on any one day will depend on ho
many are required by the armoured regiments and training establishments, or are in the repair pool. On 4 July 2003, there were 17 tanks held at Ashchurch.
Combat Aircraft
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what RAF and RN combat aircraft have a primary (a) reconnaissance, (b) air defence and (c) ground attack role; and what proportion of these aircraft can carry smart armaments. [124051]
Mr. Ingram: The Tornado GR4/GR4A, Sea Harrier FA2, Harrier GR7, and Jaguar aircraft are all capable of conducting a reconnaissance role.
8 Jul 2003 : Column 698W
The Tornado F3 and Sea Harrier FA2 aircraft have a primary air defence role.
The Tornado GR4, Harrier GR7 and Jaguar aircraft have a primary ground attack role.
All combat aircraft types are capable of carrying smart armaments although this capability may not be fitted to each individual aircraft within the fleet.
Congo
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British troops have been deployed to the Congo; what their role is; and if he will make a statement on the progress of joint operations with other allied troops. [124048]
Mr. Ingram: As at 7 July, 88 United Kingdom troops were deployed as part of the EU-led multinational force in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Operation ARTEMIS). The majority of these troops are Royal Engineers whose role is to improve the quality and size of Bunia airport, which is of vital importance given the remoteness of the region. The remainder are staff officers and support personnel. A further six UK military personnel are deployed as part of the UN Mission (MONUC), based in Kinshasa.
Operations by the EU-led force have gone well and Bunia is reported as calm, although the situation remains volatile.
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to increase troop levels in the Congo; who is in overall command of allied troops in the region; and when the troops currently deployed were last involved in active operations. [124049]
Mr. Ingram: There are currently no plans to increase the number of United Kingdom troops deployed either as part of the EU-led multinational force in the Congo (Operation ARTEMIS) or as part of the UN mission (MONUC), although the situation remains under constant review.
Troops deployed on Op ARTEMIS are under EU control, and General Neveux has been appointed by EU member nations as the Operational Commander. Troops deployed on MONUC are under UN control and General Diallo has been appointed by the UN as Force Commander. As with all multinational operations, although the UK has delegated some elements of command and control to the EU and UN respectively, Full Command of any UK military personnel is retained in the UK.
The majority of the UK troops deployed on Op ARTEMIS are Royal Engineers from 42 Field Squadron of 28 Engineer regiment, who handed over from their previous tour of operation in Northern Ireland on 31 January 2003.
D-Day Veterans
Mr. McCabe: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received on recognition for Midlands veterans at the 60th anniversary of the D-Day landings; and when he will announce the programme of commemoration events. [123844]
8 Jul 2003 : Column 699W
Mr. Caplin [holding answer 7 July 2003]: No such representations have been received. However I am aware of local media interest in this matter. Her Majesty's Government is represented on the French Government's Normandie Memorie 60eme Anniversaire Committee which is developing a full programme of commemorative events in France from 4 June 2004 onwards. I refer my hon. Friend to my letter of 7 July 2003, a copy of which has been placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assistance his Department is providing to the Normandy Veterans Association to (a) organise and (b) implement the commemoration events for the 60th anniversary of D-Day. [122307]
Mr. Caplin: The Government's position on this matter is outlined in my letter of 7 July 2003. I refer the hon. Member to the copy of the letter placed in the Library of the House.
Depleted Uranium
Mr. Gardiner: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) pursuant to his answer of 12 May 2003, Official Report, column 38W, on depleted uranium, when his Department plans to publish information on the depleted uranium it has fired in its area of operation in Iraq; [116216]
- (2) pursuant to his answer of 12 May 2003, Official Report, column 38W, on depleted uranium, if his Department will work with the Department of Defence in the United States of America to draw up a combined report on depleted uranium that has been fired by allied forces in Iraq. [116215]
Mr. Caplin: The Ministry of Defence agrees that information should be released on how much depleted uranium has been used in the Iraq conflict and where. NATO provided information following use of DU in the Balkans conflict and the United Kingdom will do so for DU it has fired in its area of operations in Iraq. We have released information on the weight of DU expended in theatre, and are releasing information on the geographical locations of firing sites to UNEP.
I refer my hon. Friend to the answer my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence gave on 4 June 2003, Official Report, column 445W, to the hon. Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn). We are currently in discussion with the United States about their use of DU munitions.
Iraq
Mr. Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on (a) Territorial Army personnel in Iraq and (b) the expected numbers stationed there over the next six months. [123479]
Mr. Caplin: Members of the Territorial Army (TA) have been deployed to the Gulf either as members of formed TA units and sub units or as Individual Reinforcements augmenting Regular Army units. Working alongside their Regular counterparts, they played a full and vital role during the war in Combat, Combat Support and Combat Service Support roles. In all, the Reserves (TA and Regular Reserves) formed just over 10 per cent. of the deployed Land element of our
8 Jul 2003 : Column 700W
forces; a figure which is in keeping with the level of TA and Reserve participation in other Operations such as Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan.
Of the first tranche of TA mobilised for service relating to the Gulf conflict, some 1,825 members have been demobilised so far. Approximately 1,700 remain in the Gulf and the vast majority of these will be returning home shortly. They will be replaced in the coming weeks by a second tranche of approximately 2,050 TA personnel who will have, on average, a deployment period in theatre of six months.
Military Operations (Cost)
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the average monthly cost of military operations in (a) Afghanistan and (b) Iraq have been in the last three months. [123403]
Mr. Ingram: The Department identifies the costs of operations in terms of the net additional costs it has incurred. The costs, which the Department would have incurred had the operation not been undertaken—expenditure on wages and salaries or on conducting training exercises for example—are deducted from the total costs of the operation.
I regret the information cannot be provided in precisely the format requested. Costs are not incurred on a regular monthly basis and to provide such an average would be misleading.
Actual and provisional outturn for operations in Afghanistan are as follows:
| Operating costs(2) | Expenditure on capital items(3) | |
|---|---|---|
| 2001–02 | 188 | 34 |
| 2002–03 (provisional outturn) | 236 | 75 |
(2) Defined as Resource DEL in Main Supply Estimates.
(3) Defined as Capital DEL in Main Supply Estimates.
Full definitions of Resource and Capital DEL are included in the Glossary of Terms in Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis 2002–03, published by HM Treasury.
On Iraq, calculating all the costs of military action will take some time to determine since it will include the cost of ammunition, bombs and guided weapons consumed in excess of peacetime levels and the cost of equipment destroyed and damaged. These sums are likely to be significant. However, excluding costs of war-fighting (essentially those described above), the latest estimate is that the net additional cost of operations in Iraq for 2002–03 will not exceed £1 billion; the amount set aside at Spring Supplementary Estimates 2002–03.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |