|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the impact the Defence Estate's rationalisation programme will have on the married quarters estate in terms of (a) disposals and (b) a requirement for new stock. 
Mr. Touhig: The Ministry of Defence's rationalisation programme is coordinated by the Defence Estates agency whose responsibilities include the management of the Service Families Accommodation stock. Numbers of personnel and location will determine the timing and location of disposals, new build and acquisitions.
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursaunt to the answer of 20 October 2005, Official Report, column 1217W, on Trident, whether he expects to take the decision on the replacement of Trident within the next six months; and if he will make a statement. 
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of the defence budget has been spent on the nuclear deterrent in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 7 November 2005]: The annual proportion of the defence budget spent on capital and running costs of the United Kingdom independent nuclear deterrent in each year since 1997 has ranged between 2 and 4 per cent.
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the practicability of air-launched Cruise missiles as an alternative to a submarine-launched nuclear deterrent system. 
John Reid: No decisions on any replacement for Trident have yet been taken. Initial preparatory work is being undertaken by officials on possible options for the future of the UK's nuclear deterrent beyond the current planned life of the Trident system. However, Ministers have not yet begun to consider the position on this issue in any detail. It is therefore premature to speculate on the merits of any particular option.
Mr. Ingram: Decisions on which spending programmes the Ministry of Defence will complete by reverse auction are not taken centrally and there is no central programme of reverse auctions for financial year 200607.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what level of authorisation is required to complete a spending programme by reverse auction; by what criteria reverse auction is determined to be appropriate; whether any projects have been completed by reverse auction which did not meet these criteria; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: Reverse auctions are considered as a routine competitive procurement process by the Ministry of Defence and internal departments, such as Integrated Project Teams, are encouraged to utilise them wherever they are appropriate. Authorisation to use a reverse auction is provided in accordance with the MOD's delegated investment approvals processes.
Reverse auctions are normally appropriate where there is an effective field of competition and a robust specification. The likely return on the investment of the cost of the auction is also taken into account. The use of, or type of, reverse auction employed may also be determined by the likely impact on long-term value for money.
No reverse auctions have been committed to where these criteria were known to be invalid. However, there have been a small number of cases where effective competition was later demonstrated not to be present; but in all these cases the projects have remained affordable and produced acceptable outcomes for the Department.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions his Department has had with Royal Ordnance on the closure of the Chorley site; and if he will place in the Library the minutes of the meetings held. 
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 7 November 2005]: A number of meetings were held between BAES Land Systems and Ministry of Defence on their proposed closure of the Chorley site. The aim of these meetings was to ensure continued security of supply and value for money for the MOD. The documental records are of a commercial nature and as such their release would be contrary to the commercial interests of the MOD and BAES Land Systems.
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 7 November 2005]: I am aware that BAE Systems Land Systems have made an announcement regarding the closure of manufacturing operations at their Chorley site. We are confident in the BAE Systems Land Systems continuing ability to maintain security of supply in light of the closure of manufacturing operations at their Chorley site.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the security arrangements are for the Royal Ordnance Heapey storage facility in relation to (a) armed response, (b) CCTV and (c) movement of explosives. 
Stewart Hosie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether it is his policy to provide statistics relating to Scottish constituencies in terms of (a) Westminster and (b) Scottish parliamentary boundaries. 
Statistics are currently published at local authority level and can be found in Tri Service Publication 10, UK Regular Forces Distribution Across the UK, published quarterly. This publication is available in the House of Commons Library and on http://www.dasa.mod.uk/
Derek Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what contribution the Department has made to the Cave Review of Public Sector Spectrum Holdings; what assessment he has made of the potential for (a) increasing efficiency in the Department's use of the radio spectrum and (b) sharing spectrum with other organisations; and if he will make a statement. 
The MOD is striving to achieve greater effectiveness and efficiency in the use of the radio spectrum it manages. The potential for increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department's use of the radio spectrum and the potential for MOD to share more of its spectrum bands with other organisations is continuously reviewed.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|