Previous Section Index Home Page

20 Jul 2005 : Column 1754W—continued

Headquarters Land

Robert Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress on the co-location of headquarters land. [11563]

Mr. Ingram: Work to rationalise and collocate HQ land command (currently based in Wilton) and HQ Adjutant General (currently based in Upavon) is ongoing. A review of the higher level organisations is underway and in parallel, a detailed cost/benefit analysis is being carried out on a number of site options. By the end of the year we expect to be reasonably clear about the size and structure of the new organisation(s). Sites currently under consideration are all within the travel to work area for most existing staff. Any significant collocation is unlikely to commence much before 2007, but if a major new build is required, moves may extend well beyond 2008.
 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1755W
 

Health and Safety

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans his Department has to monitor the prevalence of noise-related hearing loss among servicemen and women serving in Iraq. [13578]

Mr. Touhig: There are currently no specific measures in place to monitor the prevalence of noise related hearing loss among servicemen and women serving in Iraq. However hearing tests of all service personnel are carried out at periodic medical examinations.

Iraq

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the Iraqi government on testing for Iraqi citizens who have been exposed to depleted uranium ammunition deployed by the UK in Iraq. [13670]

Mr. Touhig: None. However, Ministry of Defence officials are attending United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) seminars at which depleted uranium (DU) matters, including environmental monitoring and sampling techniques are discussed with Iraqi representatives.

Japanese Internees

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he will apologise to Professor Jack Hayward and others for the distress caused by maladministration in the development and announcement of the ex gratia scheme for British groups interned by the Japanese during the Second World War; and what tangible options are under consideration for the expression of that apology. [13498]

Mr. Touhig [holding answer 19 July 2005]: I made a public apology to Professor Hayward and those similarly affected by the way the scheme was introduced in my written statement on 13 July 2005, Official Report, columns 28–29WS. The possibility of giving tangible expression to this apology is currently under consideration; the options under consideration are financial. I expect to be able to make an announcement soon.

Management Consultants

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his Department's total spending on management consultants has been in each of the last three years. [13058]

Mr. Touhig: MOD expenditure on External Assistance (EA), broken down into separate categories, is available in the Library of the House for financial years 1995–96 to 2003–04. Figures for financial year 2004–05 will be placed in the Libraries shortly.

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the total expenditure saved in each of the last three years as a result of implementing recommendations by management consultancies within his Department. [13627]

Mr. Touhig: This information is not held centrally in the form requested and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1756W
 

Royal Navy Ships

Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Royal Navy ships have been (a) decommissioned and (b) mothballed in each of the last 10 years. [13047]

Mr. Ingram: Since 1996 the number of Royal Navy ships either withdrawn from service or placed into very low readiness (other than for purposes of major refit) are as follows:

Withdrawn from service
Placed into very low readiness (excluding for refit)
199630
199780
199840
199942
200040
200160
200251
200332
200420
200580

During the remainder of 2005 it is planned that a further four ships will be withdrawn from service and one ship will be placed into very low readiness. Vessels are routinely placed into very low readiness when undergoing major refit work. Therefore, only those ships that have been placed into very low readiness but which did not undergo refit have been included in the table. Vessels held in very low readiness remain available to the Royal Navy until reaching their out of service date and could be regenerated to the Fleet if required.

Sollis Project

Mike Gapes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the Sollis Project. [12857]

Mr. Ingram: To date, extensive searches of MOD records have found no reference to a Sollis Project.

Sonar 2087

Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which vessels are due to be fitted with Sonar 2087; and by what dates. [13051]

Mr. Ingram: On current plans eight of the Royal Navy's Type 23 Frigates will be fitted with the 2087 sonar system. It has already been fitted to HMS Westminster and will be installed on the seven remaining vessels during their next available upkeep periods. The currently planned start dates for these upkeep periods, which are subject to periodic review, are:
ShipUpkeep start date
HMS NorthumberlandUnder way
HMS RichmondUnder way
HMS SomersetApril 2006
HMS St. AlbansMay 2007
HMS SutherlandJuly 2007
HMS KentJanuary 2010
HMS PortlandNovember 2010









 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1757W
 

Submarines

Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which (a) Trafalgar and (b) Swiftsure-class submarines are (i) operational and (ii) non-operational; and for what reasons each non-operational submarine is not available to the fleet. [13053]

Mr. Ingram: There are 11 Swiftsure and Trafalgar Class submarines of which nine are currently available for fleet tasking. HMS Sovereign, HMS Spartan, HMS Superb, HMS Trafalgar, HMS Turbulent, HMS Torbay and HMS Trenchant are all fully operational. HMS Tireless and HMS Sceptre, while available to the fleet, are at a lower state of availability. HMS Tireless is currently undergoing a period of planned maintenance that will include a significant capability upgrade to include fitting Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM). HMS Sceptre will shortly start an equivalent maintenance and upgrade period.

Two submarines are currently non-operational. HMS Talent is undergoing a scheduled long overhaul period, which includes a refuel of her nuclear reactor. HMS Triumph is about to start her long overhaul period and refuel.

Surveys

Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the top four reasons provided in exit surveys in the (a) Naval Service and (b) Royal Air Force for personnel leaving were; and what proportion of responses these answers represented in each year since 1997. [8620]

Mr. Touhig: Exit surveys are conducted within the Naval Services and RAF but it should be noted that, except for RAF officers, as only a relatively small proportion of those choosing to leave respond to these surveys, their results cannot be seen as necessarily representative of their Services as a whole.

The information requested is given the following tables.

RN Ratings
April 1997 to February 1998

Aspects crucial or important in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Ability to plan own life26553.8
2Separation from family and friends23748.1
3Promotion prospects22345.2
4Job satisfaction15431.2

March 1998 to February 1999

Main reason for the decision to leave
(1st choice aspects)
NumberPercentage
1Desire to live at home6213
2Wish to take up a different career5511.5
3Promotion prospects469.6
4To marry and raise a family459.4









 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1758W
 

March 1999 to February 2000

Main reason for the decision to leave
(1st choice aspects)
NumberPercentage
1Desire to live at home6514.2
2Separation from family and friends6113.3
3Wish to take up a different career5612.2
4To marry and raise a family5211.4

March 2000 to February 2001

Main reason for the decision to leave
(1st choice aspects)
NumberPercentage
1Desire to live at home8717.2
2Wish to take up a different career7013.8
3To marry/raise a family5210.3
3Separation from family and friends5210.2
3Job satisfaction5210.2

March 2001 to February 2002

Main reason for the decision to leave
(1st choice aspects)
NumberPercentage
1Desire to live at home11019.4
2Wish to take up a different career8314.7
3To marry/raise a family6511.5
4Separation from family and friends5710.1

March 2002 to February 2003

Main reason for the decision to leave
(1st choice aspects)
NumberPercentage
1Desire to live at home12423.7
2Wish to take up a different career10319.7
3To marry/raise a family458.6
4Separation from family and friends295.5

March 2003 to January 2004

Main reason for the decision to leave
(1st choice aspects)
NumberPercentage
1Desire to live at home13222.7
2Wish to take up a different career9616.5
3To marry/raise a family6511.2
4Separation from family and friends406.9

RN Officers
June 1997 to May 1998

Aspects in decision to leave
(in order of importance)
NumberPercentage
1Job prospects if you were to remain7853.1
2Kind of Service jobs to expect in the future7651.7
3Extent of domestic disruption4530.6
4Ability to plan your own life4228.6

June 1998 to May 1999

1st choice aspects crucial or
important in decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Kind of Service jobs to expect in the future1411.8
2Job prospects if you were to remain1210.1
3Wish to take up a different career1210.1
4The desire to live at home1210.1









 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1759W
 

June 1999 to May 2000

Main reason crucial in the decision to leave
(in order of importance)
NumberPercentage
1Kind of Service jobs to expect in the future2117.1
2Job prospects if you were to remain1814.6
3Wish to take up a different career148.9
4Separation from family and friends64.9

June 2000 to May 2001

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Wish to take up a different career3017.2
2Job prospects if you were to remain2413.8
3A job opportunity (offer of a job)137.5
4The desire to live at home137.5

June 2001 to May 2002

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1A job opportunity (offer of a job)1712.3
2Job prospects if you were to remain1611.6
3The desire to live at home128.7
4The kind Service jobs in the future118

June 2002 to May 2003

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1A job opportunity (offer of a job)1510.8
2To marry/raise a family139.4
3Job prospects if you were to remain128.6
4Wish to take up a different career117.9
4The appointing process117.9
4Desire to live at home117.9

June 2003 to May 2004

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Wish to take up a different career1214.6
2A job opportunity (offer of a job)1113.4
3Kind of Service jobs in the future78.5
3Wish to marry/raise a family78.5

RM Other Ranks
April 1997 to March 1998

Aspects crucial or important in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1st choice aspectPay in general2617.3
2nd choice aspectPromotion prospects1711.7
3rd choice aspectPromotion prospects
Pay in general
1711.7
4th choice aspectDrafting process1510.8

April 1998 to March 1999

Aspects crucial or important in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1st choice aspectWish to take up a different
career
2214.9
2nd choice aspectDesire to live at home1912.8
3rd choice aspectWish to take up a different
career
1510.2
4th choice aspectPay in general139.3









 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1760W
 

May 2000 to April 2001

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Wish to take up a different career4226.9
2Desire to live at home2113
3Job satisfaction1418.7
3Pay in general1418.7
4To marry/raise a family84.97

April 2001 to March 2002

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Wish to take up a different career4123.7
2Desire to live at home2413.9
3To marry/raise a family169.2
4Pay in general116.4

May 2002 to April 2003

Main (1st choice) reason crucial in the
decision to leave
NumberPercentage
1Wish to take up a different career3622.2
2To marry/raise a family2314.2
3Desire to live at home1811.1
4Pay in general138

RAF Airmen's top four reasons for leaving on own decision 1998 to 2004 (no survey before 1998)

1998Percentage
N = 399
1Promotion prospects28.3
2Lack of job satisfaction22.8
3If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a
second career
16.0
4Promotion does not appear to be related to abilities14.3

1999Percentage
N = 717
1Promotion prospects22.5
2Lack of job satisfaction16.6
3If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a second career14.6
4Family stability14.4

2000Percentage
N = 896
1Promotion prospects23.4
2Lack of job satisfaction19.9
3Family stability15.7
4If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a second career15.3

Percentage
2001N = 769
1Promotion prospects17.3
2Lack of job satisfaction16.6
3If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a second career15.5
4Family stability15.3









 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1761W
 

2002Percentage
N = 774
1Lack of job satisfaction (1=)18.5
2Family stability (1=)18.5
3If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a second career17.1
4Promotion prospects16.9

2003Percentage
N = 697
1Family stability20.7
2Lack of job satisfaction19.9
3Promotion prospects15.2
4If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a second career15.1

2004Percentage
N = 542
1Lack of job satisfaction26.2
2Service morale21.6
3Family stability20.8
4If I stayed in any longer it would be difficult to start a second career20.7

RAF Officers top four reasons for leaving 1996 to-2004

1996–97 (n=173)Percentage
1Employment opportunities outside the RAF80.3 (n=139)
2Career prospects outside the RAF72.3 (n=125)
3Job satisfaction66.5 (n=115)
4The impact of change on the RAF64.8 (n=112)

1997–98 (n=249)Percentage
1Employment opportunities outside the RAF74.7 (n=186)
2Service morale68.3 (n=170)
3Career prospects outside the RAF67.9 (n=169)
4Future of the RAF65.5 (n=163)

1998–99 (n=228)Percentage
1Employment opportunities outside the RAF75.4 (n=172)
2The effects of civilianisation and contractorisation on the RAF67.1 (n=153)
3Career prospects outside the RAF66.7 (n=152)
4Service morale65.4 (n=149)

1999–2000 (n=276)Percentage
1Employment opportunities outside the RAF72.5 (n=200)
2Job satisfaction66.6 (n=184)
3Career prospects outside the RAF63.1 (n=174)
4Service morale62.7 (n=173)

2000–01 (n=262)Percentage
1Future job satisfaction71.8 (n=188)
2Employment opportunities outside the RAF71.0 (n=186)
3Career prospects outside the RAF66.1 (n=173)
4Current job satisfaction62.6 (n=164)









 
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1762W
 

2001–02 (n=196)Percentage
1Future job satisfaction77.0 (n=151)
2Employment opportunities outside the RAF66.3 (n=130)
3Family stability62.8 (n=123)
4Promotion prospects61.7 (n=121)

2002–03 (n=184)Percentage
1Future job satisfaction78.3 (n=144)
2Family stability66.3 (n=122)
3Separation from family64.7 (n=119)
4Employment opportunities outside the RAF62.0 (n=114)

2003–04 (n=180)1Percentage
1Family stability81.3 (n=122)
2To spend more time with my family81.2 (n=121)
3Employment opportunities outside the RAF79.2 (n=122)
4Career prospects outside the RAF78.1 (n=121)


(30) Percentages for 2003–04 responses include only those individuals who answered an individual item, not for the whole response rate. Responses for 1996 to 2003, however are for the whole response rate.



Next Section Index Home Page