| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Atomic Weapons Establishment
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what studies are being carried out on future warhead options by officials at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston. [78962]
Des
Browne: There is no programme to develop a new UK nuclear
warhead. As was stated in the 1998 Strategic Defence Review, we retain
a minimum capability to design and manufacture a new warhead,
should one be required. Work by officials is now underway to prepare for
decisions on the future of the UK's nuclear deterrent and also to keep
options open in advance of these decisions. It remains the case that no
decisions have yet been
taken.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans there are for the construction of an additional tritium facility at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston. [76767]
Des Browne: There are currently no plans to construct an additional tritium facility at AWE. Essential refurbishment and replacement of existing facilities is planned as part of the site investment programme announced by my predecessor on 19 July 2005.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans there are for the construction of a new facility at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston to make highly enriched uranium warhead components. [76768]
Des Browne: A number of options are under consideration for ensuring we retain the requisite capability. No decisions have yet been taken. The capability to manufacture highly enriched uranium is required in order to maintain the existing Trident warhead throughout its intended in-service life and to provide material for naval propulsion.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of the A91 building at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston. [76773]
Des Browne: Plans for building A91 have not yet been formulated.
Casualty Statistics
Mr. MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the ratio is between fatalities and injuries among UK armed services personnel on active service in Iraq. [73735]
Des Browne: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 16 June 2006, Official Report, columns 1525-26W, to the hon. Member for Woodspring (Dr. Fox).
Challenger Tanks
Mr. Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of Challenger’s performance in desert conditions in Iraq; and whether he has plans to (a) increase the number deployed and (b) improve performance of the Challenger in hot climates. [79545]
Mr. Ingram: A programme of modifications to optimise the Challenger 2 Main Battle tank (CR2 MET) for use in desert conditions was begun in October 2002, including a dust mitigation package. The CR2 has performed extremely well throughout operations in Iraq and continues to do so. There are no plans to increase the numbers currently deployed. Performance, under all climatic conditions, is kept under constant review.
Cluster Munitions
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has discussed with the Belgian Government its decision to ban cluster munitions. [79687]
Mr. Ingram: No formal discussions have taken place between the Secretary of State for Defence and the Belgian Government on the subject of its decision to ban cluster munitions.
Complaints Management
Mrs. Humble: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date the review of his Department's harassment complaints procedure was initiated; what its terms of reference were; what the target date is for completion; and what arrangements he is making for publication. [79917]
Mr. Watson: The review of harassment complaints procedures was initiated on 10 May 2006. Its purpose is to review current procedures and guidance and to recommend changes as necessary. The review is due to be completed in December 2006 and the outcome will be published in a Defence Instruction Notice and other internal media.
Departmental Bills
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for legislation in the next Session of Parliament; and if he will make a statement. [78854]
Mr. Watson: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Leader of the House on 16 June 2006, Official Report, column 1432W.
Departmental Websites
Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many websites there are within his responsibilities; and what the total cost of maintaining such websites was in the last year for which figures are available. [79063]
Mr. Ingram: There are 12 external websites that are within the responsibilities of the Secretary of State for Defence, and the annual cost of running them is £1,781,123.
Disability Pensions
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the efficiency of the operation of the administration of disability pensions awarded to former members of the British Army recruited from the Indian subcontinent during the Second World War. [74110]
Mr. Watson: There is no evidence of systemic problems with the administration of the scheme. In one recent case resolution was delayed due to the difficulties of arranging a medical board in India, compounded by an administrative oversight.
Engagements
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the (a) name and (b) rank of police officers his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Hoon), met in his official capacity between 1 July and 31 August 2003. [65233]
Des Browne: My right hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Mr. Hoon) met no police officers in his official capacity as the then Secretary of State for Defence between 1 July and 31 August 2003, apart from the regular contact he had with those responsible for his personal protection.
Future Rapid Effect System Programme
Mr. Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the progress of the Future Rapid Effect System programme; and whether the programme is on schedule. [79544]
Mr. Ingram: FRES is in its initial Assessment Phase. The broad aims of this phase are to further define the FRES capability and develop a series of affordable options for meeting the requirement; to develop optimum procurement and support strategies for future phases and to manage technology and supplier risk to acceptable levels.
All the technical risk reduction work (the Technology Demonstrator Programmes) has been launched and is on schedule.
Iraq (Military Medals)
Mr. Peter Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many medals have been awarded to soldiers for serving in Iraq. [78769]
Mr. Watson: As at 19 June 2006, the following medals have been issued to service personnel who have served or are serving in Iraq.
| Award | Number awarded/issued |
| (1)
This figure is based on the statistics for the total applications
assessed, minus 2 per cent. which is the estimated percentage for those
applications rejected as not meeting the eligibility
criteria. | |
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 25 May 2006, Official Report, column 1989W, on the Iraq medal, whether any British civilian police officers have been awarded the Iraq service medal. [79667]
Mr. Watson: The MOD Iraq Medal has not been awarded to any British civilian police officers.
NATO Missile Defence Study
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the NATO Missile Defence Feasibility Study will be published; and what role he will play in decisions based on the study. [78951]
Des Browne: The NATO Missile Defence Feasibility Study is classified and the disclosure of its content would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of UK armed forces or that of our allies. NATO has no plans to publish the study, but any decisions based on it will be the subject of NATO discussions in the normal way, in which the UK will be fully engaged.
Non-Proliferation Treaty
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent steps the Government have taken to implement its disarmament obligations under Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. [71522]
Des Browne [pursuant to the reply, 22 May 2006, Official Report, c. 1329-30W]: The WE117 nuclear bomb referred to in the answer should have been shown as the WE177 nuclear bomb.
Panther Command and Liaison Vehicle
Robert Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with which units the seven Panther command and liaison test vehicles are in service; and if he will make a statement. [79404]
Mr. Ingram: The Panther Command and Liaison Vehicle is not yet in-service. The seven test vehicles are currently participating in trials at the Armoured Test and Development Unit in Bovington.
Robert Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the in-service date is for the Panther Command and Liaison Vehicle; and in what order units will receive these vehicles. [79405]
Mr. Ingram: The current approved ISD for the Panther vehicle is November 2007. In line with current plans, units will receive their vehicles in the following order:
Training establishments;
Lead brigade;
Follow-on brigades;
Remainder of field force users and RAF.
Porton Down
Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many animals were used in scientific tests at Porton Down in each of the last three years, broken down by species. [80152]
Mr. Ingram: Dstl Porton Down submits annual returns to the Home Office detailing the number of procedures undertaken which involve the use of animals as defined in the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.
The annual returns to the Home Office for the years 2003 to 2005, by species, are detailed in the following table.
| 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | |
I also refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 8 May 2006, Official Report, column 41W, to the hon. Member for Portsmouth South, (Mr. Hancock).
Potential Terrorist Threats
Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what work has been carried out to (a) locate and (b) monitor foreign subjects who are a potential terrorist threat to (i) the UK and (ii) British people living abroad. [78200]
Mr. McNulty: I have been asked to reply.
Law enforcement, security and intelligence agencies have development programmes for fighting terrorism which includes work to locate and monitor foreign nationals who represent a potential terrorist threat. The specific police budget for counter terrorism will have grown fourfold between the financial years 2002-03 and 2007-08 (in the period after the attacks of 11 September 2001). Across Government there has been a doubling of resources for counter terrorism and resilience in the same period to over £2 billion. This has included substantial additional resources to the security and intelligence agencies, including an additional £85 million since the July bombings last year to bring forward planned enhancements of their ability to collect, analyse and act upon intelligence to seek out and disrupt terrorist activity.
The specific actions taken to locate and monitor foreign nationals who are a potential terrorist threat to Britain and British citizens abroad are operational matters for law enforcement, security and intelligence agencies.
Priory Group
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many service personnel have been treated by the Priory Group in each year since the contract with the Group began; and how many have subsequently (a) returned to duty and (b) been discharged; [76847]
(2) for what reasons the Priory Group was selected as the sole provider of in-patient psychiatric healthcare service; and which other companies applied to be considered; [76848]
(3) what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the treatment provided by the Priory Group for service personnel; and what criteria he used to make that assessment. [76849]
Mr. Watson [holding answer 19 June 2006]: We assess that the Priory Group provides an excellent in-patient psychiatric service based on an individual's clinical needs. Service liaison officers routinely visit the Group's hospital units where we have in-patients to ensure that our arrangements are working effectively in terms of patient care and treatment, including attending ward rounds that involve service patients; the service liaison officer also acts as a “service advocate” for the patient. They also meet regularly with Priory representatives to discuss treatment and best practice. We assess the contractual elements of our agreement with the Priory Group at quarterly meetings held between the MOD and the Priory Group. Both the service liaison officer and contract meetings examine the Priory's performance against the particular performance indicators of the contract. Furthermore, the MOD’s Directorate of Healthcare monitors, on a daily basis, case management and financial components of the contract.
The MOD's requirement for the provision of in-patient mental healthcare was advertised in the "Official Journal of the European Communities" and the "MOD Contracts Bulletin". Four companies—The Priory Group Ltd., Cygnet Healthcare Ltd., Affinity Healthcare, and Selrack Consulting—expressed an interest in the requirement. They were then invited to an Industry Day, in order to give them a better understanding of the requirement and to enable them to discuss with MOD in more detail what they would be able to provide. Following the exchange of information at the Industry Day, the MOD decided that Selrack Consulting would be unable to provide the services required and therefore invited the three remaining companies to tender. The Priory Group Ltd. and Cygnet Healthcare Ltd. submitted bids. The bid from The Priory Group Ltd. best met our requirements to provide high-quality mental health inpatient care nationwide, without delay, and within easy reach of unit, base or home.
The contract with the Priory Group commenced on1 December 2003. Reception of service patients by the Priory Group's inpatient facilities was phased-in between 1 December 2003 and April 2004. This phase-in period allowed MOD and the Priory Group to develop interoperable working procedures and the MOD the opportunity to gradually enhance its community-based mental health teams.
Since the beginning of the contract, The Priory Group has admitted 730 service personnel for in-patient treatment. This can be broken down by year as follows:
| Number of patients | |
| (1
)From l December
2003. | |
While an individual's medical record will show their medical history, at present, we do not hold centrally a collated set of records specifically limited to former patients who have returned to duty or have been discharged following treatment at the Priory. However, we have started a study into the medium to long-term prognosis of former patients who were discharged from Priory care between the 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2005. This will help to enhance our understanding of the long-term effectiveness of the treatment they received.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |