---

19 Jul 2005 : Column 1531W—continued

Defence Export Services

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the individuals, companies, organisations and Government bodies which attended the Defence Export Services Organisation Symposium held on 9 March. [10675]

Mr. Ingram: I will place in the Library of the House a list of the companies, organisations and Government Departments from which representatives were expected at the Defence Export Services Organisation Symposium. No record is available identifying the individuals who were present at the event.

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a copy of the (a) programme and (b) minutes of the Defence Export Services Organisation Symposium held on 9 March. [10676]

Mr. Ingram: The proceedings of the Defence Export Services Organisation (DESO) Symposium were not minuted. The day's programme, and the speeches by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, the noble Lord the Minister for Defence Procurement, and my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under Secretary for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, will be placed in the Library of the House.

Defensive Aid Suites

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the contract with Akers Krutbruk Protection AB for defensive aid suites; and what the purpose is of defensive aid suites. [10927]

Mr. Ingram: A defensive aids suite (DAS) describes a group of integrated sensors and counter-measures for self-defence of armoured fighting vehicles and other
 
19 Jul 2005 : Column 1532W
 
military platforms. A DAS is capable of providing automatic or semi-automatic response to threats, thereby increasing survivability without the weight burden of additional armour.

A contract was awarded to Akers Krutbruk Protection AB in May 2005. The contract will enable the Department to assess and further develop the armoured fighting vehicles effectiveness of DAS systems.

Departmental Budget

David T.C. Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much was allocated to the Department for each year since 1975. [11519]

Mr. Touhig: Final annual allocations to the Ministry of Defence are voted by Parliament in the spring supplementary estimates, copies of which are held in the Library of the House. In addition, the Defence Analytical Services Agency publishes annual statistics on defence expenditure, available on its website, which include comparative figures over time. These figures are, however, based on actual outturns, rather than allocations. The hon. Member will wish to note also that financial planning and management moved from a cash to a resource basis in two incremental stages from 2001–02 and 2003–04, with the result that direct comparisons across these periods are not possible.

Future Rapid Effects System

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Panther Command and Liaison vehicle is an integral part of the Future Rapid Effects System package. [12675]

Mr. Ingram: Panther is being procured to provide a multi-purpose vehicle for the Army employed primarily in command and liaison tasks. While it is not an integral element of the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) programme it is one of a number of options being assessed during the initial Assessment Phase to establish whether it has the potential to fulfil some elements of the FRES requirement.

HMS Invincible

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of HMS Invincible. [11288]

Mr. Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him about the planned decommissioning date for HMS Invincible on 13 July 2005, Official Report, column 1078W.

Iraq

Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which document Colonel Terrington saw in December 2003 to which the Minister of State referred in his letter to the hon. Member for Camarthen, East and Dinefwr of 31 January. [9038]

Mr. Ingram: Colonel Terrington saw a document on 26 December 2003, entitled CJTF-7 CG MEMO—CJTF-7 Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy"
 
19 Jul 2005 : Column 1533W
 
dated 28 September 2003. We have no further information on the content of that document, which was not the extant CJTF-7 interrogation policy at that time.

Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent discussions he has had with his US counterpart regarding the co-ordination of withdrawal of US and UK troops from Iraq. [13271]

John Reid: I hold regular discussions with the United States Secretary of Defense about progress in establishing a free, stable and democratic Iraq. We both agree that coalition forces should remain in Iraq for as long as the Iraqi Government judge that the coalition is required to provide security and to assist the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF).

Factors in determining the scope and timeline for eventual UK force level reductions in Iraq will include: the readiness of the ISF to take responsibility for the range of security tasks; the overall security situation; and progress in the political process.

Japanese Internees

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many applications under the ex gratia scheme for British groups interned by the Japanese during the second world war have been refused on grounds of their not satisfying the bloodlink criteria; if he will reconsider these applications in response to the report of the parliamentary and health service ombudsman of 12 July; and if he will make a statement. [13497]

Mr. Touhig: We estimate that some 1,100 claims were rejected because they did not meet the bloodlink" criterion. As will be clear from my written statement on 13 July 2005, Official Report, columns 28–29WS, we do not consider that the parliamentary and health service ombudsman's report provides grounds for reviewing these cases. The Department's rejection of claims on the bloodlink" criterion is also affected by the recent High Court decision on the application for judicial review by Mrs. Diana Elias. The Secretary of State for Defence is considering his response to this judgment.

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he is taking in response to the conclusion of the parliamentary and health service ombudsman (HC 324) that there was injustice to Professor Jack Hayward and others caused by the maladministration of the ex gratia scheme for British groups interned by the Japanese during the second world war; and if he will establish a departmental inquiry. [13499]

Mr. Touhig: I refer my hon. Friend to my written ministerial statement on 13 July 2005, Official Report, columns 28–29WS. I have no plan to undertake a departmental inquiry.

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the reasons were for his rejection of the first and second remedies proposed by the parliamentary and health service ombudsman in the case of Professor Jack Hayward and maladministration in relation to the devising, announcing and operation of the ex gratia scheme for British groups interned by the Japanese during the second world war (HC 324); and if he will make a statement. [13500]

 
19 Jul 2005 : Column 1534W
 

Mr. Touhig: The Government's reasons for rejecting the first and second remedies proposed by the parliamentary and health service ombudsman are set out fully in their response which was published as an annex to the ombudsman's report (4th Report—Session 2005–2006, HC 324) when it was laid before Parliament on 12 July 2005.

Military Uniform Contract

Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library the minutes of the recent meeting on the cut and sew contract; and if he will make a statement. [12410]

Mr. Ingram: If my hon. Friend would provide details of the meeting to which he is referring I would be pleased to consider his request.

Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many regiments have been provided with battle dress made in China under the cut and sew contract. [12479]

Mr. Ingram: This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. While it would be possible to identify the provenance of a specific item of clothing from the contract number on its label, there is no mechanism, nor any business requirement, to track general issues of clothing to operational units by country of manufacture.

---