| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1115W—continued
Ships
Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the merits of delaying the withdrawal from service of HMS (a) Superb and (b) Trafalgar; and if he will make a statement. [223528]
Mr. Ingram: Since the restructuring of the Astute contract in 2003 the build of the first of class is proceeding to plan. There is at present, therefore, no reason to reconsider the withdrawal of HMS Superb or HMS Trafalgar.
Sonar 2170
Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what criteria will be used to determine which surface ships will be equipped with Sonar 2170; [223108]
(2) in what circumstances surface ships would be deployed without a Sonar 2170 set; and what assessment he has made of the likely implications; [223109]
(3) in what circumstances Sonar 2170 radio sets would be transferred from one Royal Navy ship to another; [223106]
(4) what assessment he has made of the length of time needed to remove Sonar 2170 from one surface ship and re-install it on another. [223107]
Mr. Ingram: Sonar 2170 is a sonar system designed to provide anti-ship torpedo defence. When deciding which ships will be fitted with Sonar 2170, the programme and military tasks of each ship, including an assessment of the underwater threat in the area in which it will operate, will be taken into account.
Surface ships whose military tasking is not assessed as exposing them to a high risk of torpedo attack will continue to be deployed without Sonar 2170. Those units assessed as facing lower levels of risk will continue to be protected by other measures.
Sonar 2170 is a system which is designed for transfer from ship to ship. The system will be removed from ships if they are alongside for any length of time, for example during refits.
Transfer of Sonar 2170 from ship to ship takes around four days. This extremely efficient process allows the equipment to be provided to those units that require it
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1116W
operationally and represents a cost-effective means of providing advanced capability when and where it is required.
Submarine Acquisition Study
Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 10 March 2005, Official Report, column 1995W, on the Submarine Acquisition Study, if he will list the (a) names and (b) designations of the members of the Submarine Acquisition Study. [223907]
Mr. Ingram: The purpose of the Submarine Acquisition Modernisation (SAM) project is, through a coherent, long-term approach to the management of the nuclear submarine programme, to implement a more efficient, more effective and sustainable submarine enterprise through life, leading to a significant reduction in whole life costs and greater submarine availability.
SAM is a joint MOD/industry study being driven by a Defence Logistics Organisation (DLO) team leader with membership drawn from specialists within the DLO, the Defence Procurement Agency (DPA) and the four main industrial partners (Devonport Management Limited (DML), Babcock Naval Services, BAE Systems (Barrow) and Rolls Royce). However, in order to comply with our obligations and protect the identity of individuals, we will not be releasing the names or designations.
Trident
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he last undertook a risk assessment of command and control procedures for the Trident nuclear missile system. [218342]
Mr. Hoon: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 14 March 2005, Official Report, column 33W.
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Defencewhat assessment he has made of possible acquisition costs for a replacement for the Trident nuclear warhead. [218349]
Mr. Hoon: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 1 March 2005, Official Report, column 1148W, to the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr.Salmond) and the hon. Member for North Tayside (Mr. Wishart).
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will inform Parliament of any expenditure undertaken in relation to research and development for a replacement for the Trident nuclear missile system. [218351]
Mr. Hoon: Normal procedures for reporting to Parliament apply to such expenditure.
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has received representations from the Scottish Executive regarding (a) Trident in Scotland, (b) the formulation of the UK position on non-proliferation of weapons and (c) the transportation of nuclear materials relating to the Trident weapon system. [224027]
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1117W
Mr. Hoon: I have received no specific representations from the Scottish Executive on these matters. MOD officials do however have regular contact with the Executive in respect of nuclear matters which fall within the Executive's responsibility.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the annual operational costs for a replacement for the Trident nuclear submarine and missile system. [218491]
Mr. Hoon: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 1 March 2005, Official Report, column 1148W.
Vaccine Damage
Ross Cranston: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many payments were made by his Department to children suffering from vaccine damage between 1975 and the introduction of the Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979. [223011]
Mr. Caplin: The Department for Work and Pensions is responsible for administering vaccine damage payments under the Vaccine Damage Payments Act 1979. The Ministry of Defence has no record of making common-law compensation payments to children suffering from vaccine damage.
HOME DEPARTMENT
Essex Police
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department how many hours police officers have spent attending incidents inside and outside nightclubs in each year since 1997 in (a) Essex and (b) Southend. [222476]
Ms Blears: The information requested is not collected centrally.
Accidents
Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many accidents occurred at his departmental premises in each of the last five years involving (a) members of his Department's staff and (b) members of the public; [222566]
(2) whether he publishes data for the number of accidents at work involving employees of his Department; and if he will make a statement; [222581]
(3) what arrangements for monitoring accidents at work involving members of staff of his Department are in place; and if he will make a statement. [222631]
Fiona Mactaggart: The available information for each of the last five years is as follows:
| Staff | Members of the public/visitors | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 33 | 1 |
| 2001–02 | 21 | 0 |
| 2002–03 | 30 | 0 |
| 2003–04 | 34 | 0 |
| 2004–05(4) | 36 | 0 |
(4)2004–05 figures are for 11 months only up to 28 February 2005.
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1118W
| Staff | Members of the public/visitors | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 125 | 2 |
| 2001–02 | 175 | 6 |
| 2002–03(5)(5507620006) | 299 | — |
| 2003–04 | 637 | — |
| 2004–05(7) | 803 | — |
(5)From 1 April 2002—figures include staff, visitors, detainees and contractors.
(6)From 1April 2002—records include instances of verbal abuse and threatening behaviour towards staff.
(7)2004–05 figures are for 9 months only up to 31 December 2004.
| Staff | Members of the public/visitors | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 6,578 | 138 |
| 2001–02 | 5,361 | 74 |
| 2002–03(8) | 9,994 | 261 |
| 2003–04 | 8,058 | 218 |
| 2004–05(9) | — | — |
(8)From 1 April 2002—figures include both visitors and contractors.
(9)2004–05 figures are not yet available.
| Staff | Members of the public/visitors | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 54 | 1 |
| 2001–02 | 81 | 4 |
| 2002–03 | 71 | 4 |
| 2003–04 | 77 | 1 |
| 2004–05(10) | 77 | 1 |
(10)2004–05 figures are for 11 months only up to 28 February 2005.
| Staff | Members of the public/visitors | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 347 | 9 |
| 2001–02 | 483 | 1 |
| 2002–03 | 398 | 1 |
| 2003–04 | 338 | 5 |
| 2004–05(11) | 259 | 5 |
(11)2004–05 figures are for 10 monthly only up to 21 January 2005.
| Staff | Members of the public/visitors | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 45 | 0 |
| 2001 | 59 | 3 |
| 2002 | 74 | 0 |
| 2003 | 61 | 0 |
| 2004 | 64 | 0 |
Note:
Figures do not include student police officers.
Accidents at work are reported and monitored in a number of ways across the Department and its agencies. All accidents are reported on an internal accident reporting system. Where an accident is required to be reported to the Health and Safety Executive, the reporting procedure laid down in the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulation 1995 is followed.
Line managers are provided with guidance on reporting accidents. This includes the requirement to pass this information to others with an interest including health and safety professionals. Accident reports are then scrutinised to see what further action may be required to deal with the situation and prevent recurrence.
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1119W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |