Previous Section Index Home Page

30 Jan 2006 : Column 32W—continued

Army Battalions

Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the full strength establishment is of each battalion of the British Army; and what the actual complement of each battalion was on the most recent date for which figures are available. [45173]

Mr. Touhig: The following table shows the Army by arm/service compared to the liability. The infantry strength is broken down by regiment, but the liability is not defined individually for infantry regiments. However, the strength and establishment figures for whole infantry and Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME) by individual battalion are not held centrally and to collate these data would incur disproportionate costs.

Of the arms/services within the Army it is only the infantry and REME that have units categorised as 'battalions'.
Full-time trained strength of the Army (including full-time reserve service (FTRS) as at 1 December 2006 compared to the liability

Arm/serviceLiabilityStrengthStrength as percentage of liability
The Household Cavalry/ Royal Armoured Corps5,7905,56096
Royal Regime of Artillery7,4807,41099
Corps of Royal Engineers9,4608,78093
Royal Corps of Signals8,4408,640102
The Infantry24,62024,520100
of which:
Grenadier Guards740
Coldstream Guards760
Scots Guards680
Irish Guards600
Welsh Guards580
Royal Scots570
Royal Highland Fusiliers580
Kings Own Scottish Borderers570
Black Watch630
Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders560
Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment1,300
Royal Regiment of Fusiliers1,270
Royal Anglian Regiment1,310
Kings Own Royal Border Regiment610
King's Regiment590
Prince of Wales' Own Regiment640
Green Howards610
Queen's Lancashire Regiment680
Duke of Wellington's Regiment650
Devonshire and Dorset Regiment590
Cheshire Regiment540
Royal Welch Fusiliers650
Royal Regiment of Wales580
Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment620
Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment610
Staffordshire Regiment590
The Light Infantry Regiment1,280
Royal Green Jackets1,260
The Parachute Regiment1,990
The Royal Irish Regiment (General Service)640
Army Air Corps2,0101,98098
Royal Army Chaplains Department130140102
The Royal Logistics Corps15,70015,680100
Royal Army Medical Corps3,2702,81086
Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers9,6809,730101
Adjutant General's Corps (Provost Branch)1,8002,010112
Adjutant Generals Corps (Staff and Personnel Support Branch)4,0404,440110
Adjutant Generals Corps (Educational and Training Services Branch)290340119
Adjutant Generals Corps Royal (Army Legal Service)12010083
Royal Army Veterinary Corps19019097
Small Arms School Corps140150105
Royal Army Dental Corps42037089
Intelligence Corps1,5501,44093
Army Physical Training Corps420440105
General Service Corps(8)(8)(8)
Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps1,08084078
Corps of Army Music880940107
Long Service List480620128
Total trained regular Army and FTRS98,71097,94099
Full-time trained Army101,800101,300100

(8) Denotes zero or rounded to zero
1. FTRS figures include full, limited and home commitment.
2. Figures exclude home service battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment, mobilised reserves, Territorial Army and other reserves.
3. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
4. Liability is based on the Regular Army liability 2009.

30 Jan 2006 : Column 33W

Bottle-nosed Whale

Mr. Scott: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of whether the bottle-nosed whale calf which died during the attempted rescue on January 21 was forced up the Thames by (a) sonar from a naval vessel or (b) explosions at Shoeburyness. [45764]

Mr. Ingram: No Royal Navy ships were operating military sonar in the area of the Thames estuary or the North sea on 21 January 2006 or in the days immediately preceding 21 January 2006.

An independent company specialising in noise and vibration monitoring, has advised that the impact of Ministry of Defence activities at Shoeburyness on the marine environment at Shoeburyness is miniscule compared to the impact of everyday shipping in the area. We have no evidence to suggest that our use of Shoeburyness forced the whale up the Thames.

Compensation (Japanese Detainees)

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether it was the intention when the scheme for compensating British civilian detainees of the Japanese was established that detainees with no blood link to the UK would not be included in the scheme. [45335]

Mr. Touhig: When the scheme was first announced in November 2000, it was intended that payments would be made only to those British civilian internees who could demonstrate a close link with the United Kingdom at the time of internment. In March 2001, this
30 Jan 2006 : Column 34W
close link was defined in terms of the individual or one of his or her parents or grandparents having been born in the UK. This definition was made public in July 2001 and has become known as the birthlink criterion. My Department is currently undertaking a review of the scheme to establish what criteria were used for claims from British civilian internees that were decided before the introduction of the birthlink definition. I will report the outcome to the House.


Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many of the 41 contractors listed on 9 February 2004, Official Report, column 1177W were awarded follow-on contracts; and in cases where re-let contracts resulted in a new contractor, what the financial returns (percentage of basic material price) to his Department or the Treasury were from (a) the original and (b) the new contractors; [43203]

(2) whether the one case of arbitration referred to on of 9 February 2004, Official Report, column 1177W, has been finally settled. [43209]

Mr. Ingram [holding answer 18 January 2006]: Of the 41 contractors listed on 9 February 2004, Official Report, column 1177W, four (Serial Nos. 3, 7,16 and 36) hold or have held follow-on contracts, although not for precisely the same scope of service as for the initial contracts. The contracts are incentivised" agreements that allow contractors to retain a percentage of the final sale price of those items declared surplus to
30 Jan 2006 : Column 35W
requirements. The information requested on financial returns is commercially confidential and as such is being withheld.

The arbitration referred to 9 February 2004, Official Report, column 1177W, has not been settled.

Defence Training Review

Mr. McFadden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate his Department has made of the number of jobs that are likely to be created in the West Midlands if DCAE Cosford is selected as a preferred site in the Defence Training Review. [38989]

Mr. Touhig: The Defence Training Review programme is currently evaluating the bidding consortia's proposals. No estimation has yet been made of the number of jobs that may be created in the West Midlands as a consequence of the DTR programme. Such an estimation is dependant upon bidder's training and estates solutions, including proposed training efficiencies and the scale of distributed learning. This work will not be completed until the evaluation phase has concluded in about spring 2006.

Mr. McFadden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what account will be taken of (a) existing training resources in aerospace, ICT and engineering industries, (b) location and (c) proximity to local labour markets in evaluating sites bidding in the defence training review. [38986]

Mr. Touhig: As part of the Defence Training Review programme, comprehensive and rigorous evaluation of the bidding consortia's proposals is underway judged against defined evaluation criteria. This includes an assessment of bidders' compliance with the total requirement and the quality and deliverability of their proposals.

Mr. McFadden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the likely effect on the (a) further and high education sectors and (b) manufacturing companies of the Defence Training Review. [38987]

Mr. Touhig: The Defence Training Review (DTR) programme is currently evaluating the bidding consortia's proposals. The impact on further and higher education sectors and manufacturing companies depends on bidders' training and estates solutions, the extent to which the education and manufacturing sectors are drawn into training design, delivery and support and the exploitation of third party opportunities and revenue. Until the evaluation phase is complete and a decision has been taken to select a preferred training partner, I am not in a position to make any detailed comment on the wider impact of the DTR solution.

Next Section Index Home Page