|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Contract Number||Date Placed|
|BFIC1/06||13 December 2002|
|ESSESLC/0234||8 September 2003|
|BFIC1/30||29 September 2003|
|CB/PJHQ/012||4 December 2003|
|CB/PJHQ/013||5 December 2003|
|ESSESLC/0318||5 December 2003|
|BFIC1/08||21 January 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/017||25 February 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/031||22 April 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/032||29 April 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/035||18 May 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/036||27 May 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/037||13 July 2004|
|ESSESLC/0336||25 August 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/045||8 September 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/040||22 September 2004|
|ESSESLC/0434||19 October 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/049||27 October 2004|
|CB/PJHQ/053||9 December 2004|
Total value of the contracts is in the region of £132 million. Contract BFIC1/06 covered the supply of the temporary deployable accommodation in support of Operation Telic with contracts with the prefix ESSESL" providing the logistic support and spares provisioning to support that requirement. Contract CB/PJHQ/053 covered the supply of various personal protective equipment and contract BFIC1/30, and the remainder of contracts with the prefix CB/PHJQ, associated with the CONLOG enabling contract providing a range of logistic and infrastructure support to PJHQ operations worldwide.
Mr. Caplin: The longest sentence being served by a male following conviction at courts-martial is of detention during Her Majesty's Pleasure. There are no females presently serving a sentence of imprisonment or detention.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defencehow many members of HM armed forces were (a) disciplined and (b) dismissed from the Services for misuse of rail warrants in each of the last five years for which figures are available. 
|The Naval Service||The Army||The RAF|
The GOC NI also has under his command troops that are rear based in Great Britain that can be called forward to the Province as and when required. In addition other troops can be made available to the GOC NI from Land Command if required for example during the marching season.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 26 January 2005, Official Report, column 16WS on the reduction of Battalion Under Command GOC Northern Ireland, how many troops will remain under the command of the General Officer Commanding Northern Ireland following the changes announced in that statement; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: As at the 31 December 2004 the General Officer Commanding Northern Ireland (GOC NI) had under his command 11490 Armed Forces personnel (Navy, Army and RAF) stationed in Northern Ireland or rear-based in Great Britain. As a result of the change announced in my Written Ministerial statement of 26 January, this number is expected to reduce by some 570 personnel.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the Government's policy is on research and development of new nuclear weapons, with particular reference to low yield and bunker buster weapons and activities carried out within the Mutual Defence Agreement with the United States Administration; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Hoon: The Government's approach to future decisions on nuclear weapons policy was set out at paragraph 3.11 of the 2003 Defence White Paper (Cm60411). No research of the kind referred to by the hon. Member is carried out under the Mutual Defence Agreement.
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list those Ministry of Defence projects for which QinetiQ (a) has pre-qualified to bid and (b) is bidding (i) on its own and (ii) as a full equity partner in a consortium. 
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department has made of the potential for conflicts of interest to arise where QinetiQ is competing for Ministry of Defence contracts; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: During the QinetiQ Vesting process, the potential for such conflicts of interest was considered. To ensure any such conflicts were properly addressed the Ministry of Defence ownership interest in QinetiQ was kept completely separate from the Department's competitive contract placement activities. Compliance processes were also implemented to ensure the advice QinetiQ provides to MOD is independent of commercial contracts that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.
Mr. Ingram: The only restriction that has been placed on the ability of QinetiQ to compete for the Ministry of Defence contracts is the compliance regime which was put in place when QinetiQ was created in 2001. This regime prevents QinetiQ from entering into commercial relationships which would create an unmanageable conflict of interest and prejudice the company's ability to provide impartial advice to MOD.
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many wrecks of Royal Navy vessels lie in UK waters that have (a) not been legally explored, (b) been illegally explored and (c) been legally explored; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Caplin: Unless a RN wreck is specifically designated under the appropriate legislation (e.g. Protection of Military Remains Act 1986, Protection of Wrecks Act 1973), no licence is needed to dive on it.
To date, a total of seventeen RN wrecks have been designated under the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986, of which twelve lie within UK waters. No licences to carry out activities on the designated wrecks have yet been issued.
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he is taking to prevent historic wrecks of Royal Navy vessels being looted by treasure hunters; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Caplin: Under both United Kingdom and international law wrecked military aircraft and vessels remain the property of the state, regardless of their location and condition. Such ships have sovereign immunity from interference and the state may seek enforcement of this in an appropriate court.
The Ministry of Defence uses the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 to afford protection from unwanted interference to RN vessels wrecked after 4 August 1914, where this is considered necessary and appropriate. To date, seventeen wrecks have been designated under the Act; more will follow as part of a rolling programme.
Historic wrecks, including those of RN vessels, may also be designated under the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973. Such designations are however the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the Devolved Administrations, depending on the individual wreck's location.
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will ensure that adequate time is provided for archaeological examination and records of any finds from HMS Sussex before they are sold or otherwise disposed of; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Caplin: All items recovered from the site, including those coins that may later be sold, will be fully recorded to appropriate professional standards. Post-fieldwork assessment and analysis will result in the creation of a post-excavation assessment report. The archaeological team may then elect to undertake specific analysis or invite or permit other scholars to do so.
It is too early to speculate on the timing of disposals. Such decisions will eventually be informed by what is recovered. Under the Licence Agreement, the Government, as owner of the wreck and artefacts, retains complete discretion to retain any artefact. A decision on the sale or retention of assets can only be taken with the benefit of far more information on the wreck, its state and contents.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|