| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Jan 2006 : Column 1651W—continued
Nuclear Operations (RAF Lakenheath)
Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what procedures are in place to ensure that US aircraft based at RAF Lakenheath only carry out nuclear operations with the consent of the British Government; [43790]
(2) whether he has had any discussions with the US Administration following the leaking of the draft Joint Doctrine for Nuclear Operations concerning US strategies for using US nuclear weapons stored at RAF Lakenheath; [43792]
(3) whether he has power of veto over the operational use of US nuclear weapons based at RAF Lakenheath; [43836]
(4) what procedures are in place to monitor US activity involving the (a) nuclear weapons and (b) aircraft based at RAF Lakenheath. [43843]
Mr. Ingram: It is Government policy to neither confirm nor deny the presence of nuclear weapons at any particular location or any particular time.
I can confirm that HMG has to be fully consulted and agree before any UK-based US forces are deployed operationally. The Joint Churchill-Truman Communiqué of January 1952 stated:
"Under arrangements made for the common defence, the United States has the use of certain bases in the United Kingdom. We reaffirm the understanding that the use of these bases in an emergency would be a matter for joint decision by HM Government and the US Government in the light of the circumstances prevailing at the time."
There have not been any discussions with the US Administration following the leaking of a draft of a revised US Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations.
QinetiQ
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library the information upon which the decision to sell off the remaining Government stake in QinetiQ was taken. [41555]
John Reid:
The decision to float Qinetiq was taken by the Government, Carlyle and Qinetiq, informed by the advice from our joint financial advisers. This advice was given under contractually committed confidentiality agreements, and I am therefore unable to release it. It remains the Government's intention to retain a stake in Qinetiq after the flotation.
20 Jan 2006 : Column 1652W
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what measures are in place to safeguard the terms and conditions of current employees of QinetiQ after privatisation. [42421]
John Reid: QinetiQ became a company in July 2001. Employees who were transferred to the company were protected under TUPE regulations. This position will not change as a result of the Initial Public Offering.
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what measures are in place to protect QinetiQ sites from closure after privatisation. [42423]
John Reid: The position regarding site closures will not change as a result of an Initial Private Offering. When QinetiQ vested as a company in 2001, MOD put arrangements in place to protect assets or capabilities that are of strategic importance to UK defence and security. These are enforced through the retention of a Government special share in QinetiQ, as well as through provisions in specific contracts such as the Long Term Partnering Agreement for test and evaluation.
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether receipts from the sale of QinetiQ assets and estates after privatisation will be (a) kept by the new owners and (b) paid to the Government. [42424]
John Reid: The position regarding receipts from the sale of assets and estates will not change as a result of an IPO. When QinetiQ vested as a company in 2001, it was required to purchase the assets from the Government. This transaction was fully audited by the National Audit Office. Consequently, the receipts from the sale of assets go directly to the company. In relation to land sales, the Ministry of Defence put clawback arrangements in place to ensure that the taxpayer would benefit directly from any substantial subsequent increase in value.
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he plans to float QinetiQ as a single entity. [42426]
John Reid: The intention is to float QinetiQ as a single entity.
James Duddridge: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will list sites in the UK occupied by Qinetiq; and how much land is owned in each case; [42494]
(2) if he will list sites owned by Qinetiq in the UK that have planning permission for (a) greenfield and (b) brownfield developments. [42495]
John Reid: This is an operational matter for the company; questions should be referred to the Chief Executive at the following address:
James Duddridge: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the value is of the land owned by (a) his Department and (b) QinetiQ in Rochford and Southend East constituency. [42496]
Mr. Touhig: The value of the land owned by the Ministry of Defence in the Rochford and Southend East has been recorded as £11.5 million in existing use (that is depreciated replacement costs) terms. Land owned by QinetiQ, is an operational matter for the company; questions should be referred to the Chief Executive at the following address:
Royal Navy
Mr. Streeter: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether UK naval vessels have recently been prevented from going to sea due to a shortage of fuel or the resources to pay for fuel; and if he will make a statement. [44018]
Mr. Ingram: No Royal Navy vessels have recently been prevented from going to sea due to a shortage of fuel or the resources to pay for fuel.
Territorial Army
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the financial package remains the same for Territorial Army personnel who volunteer for a second deployment within a three-year period, having fulfilled their compulsory deployment. [43675]
Mr. Touhig: The financial package remains the same for both periods of mobilised service should a member of the Territorial Army volunteer for an additional period of service after completing a compulsory commitment. In April of last year, the Department introduced statutory instrument 859, which improves considerably the financial assistance available to reservists on call-out.
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the Territorial Army commitment is to the civil contingency reaction force; and if he will make a statement. [43681]
Mr. Touhig: Civil contingency reaction forces (CCRFs) are based on the 14 Territorial Army (TA) infantry battalions spread across the country. Each CCRF comprises a pool of around 500 personnel drawn from the volunteer reserve forces, mainly the TA, who have volunteered for the CCRF commitment in addition to their normal role.
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence under what circumstances the 12-month Territorial Army compulsory mobilisation within a three-year period can be extended. [43682]
20 Jan 2006 : Column 1654W
Mr. Touhig: Operational requirements may necessitate the extension of the 12-month period of compulsory mobilisation for members of the reserve forces to two years but this would only occur under exceptional circumstances. There are no plans to extend the duration of the maximum period of obligatory service permitted under part VI of the Reserve Forces Act 1996. Reservists may voluntarily agree to extend their period of service.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |