| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
2 Oct 2006 : Column 2568W—continued
Harrier Fleet
John Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the impact of further extended deployment of Harrier jets in Afghanistan beyond March 2007 on the deep maintenance and upgrade programme of the Harrier fleet. [91234]
Mr. Ingram: The Harrier 'depth' facility at RAF Cottesmore is specifically designed to provide the flexibility to absorb urgent tasking in addition to scheduled maintenance and future upgrade work. It has been assessed that there will be no impact on the joint maintenance and upgrade programme if a further extension to Harrier deployment in Afghanistan beyond March 2007 becomes an approved operational requirement.
John Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the availability rate is of the Harrier jets deployed in Afghanistan. [91235]
Mr. Ingram: The planned availability rate for the six Harrier GR7s currently deployed in Afghanistan has, and continues to be, met. It would not be appropriate to reveal the amount of hours or tasking this includes, as to do so could compromise the safety of coalition forces.
Iraq
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his answer of 22 May 2006, Official Report, column 1321W, on Iraq, how many (a) UK and (b) coalition (i) civilian and (ii) military personnel have been (A) killed and (B) injured in each attack in the Iraqi provinces of Al Basrah, Al Muthanna, Dhi Qar and Maysan since January 2006. [85619]
Des Browne: The following table shows the number of Coalition military personnel who have died in Multi-National Division (South East) and been classed as killed in action, including as a result of hostile action, between January and June 2006, broken down by province.
| Basra | Maysan | Muthanna | Dhi Qar | |
| (1)
Non-UK
fatality. | ||||
The following table shows the number of Coalition military and civilian personnel wounded as a result of hostile action and treated at the Shaibah Role 3 facility in Iraq in between January and June 2006. These records are kept for operational medical planning and do not include information on where each injury occurred and in what incident nor on the nationality of non-UK personnel treated.
| UK military | UK civilian | Non-UK military | Non-UK civilian | |
Information on numbers of UK military and civilian personnel casualties in Iraq is published on the Ministry of Defence website at:
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/Operations Factsheets/OperationsInIraqBritishCasualties.htm
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which companies applied to run the Occupational Authority's Media Network in Iraq; and what criteria were used in deciding who would be awarded the contract. [87571]
Des Browne: This is a matter for the United States Government.
David T.C. Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many soldiers who have served in Iraq since 2003 have subsequently resigned from the armed forces in each of the last three years. [90748]
Derek Twigg [holding answer 11 September 2006]: The data is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Iraq/Afghanistan
Mr. Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what contingency plans have been made by the Government in case the level of conflict involving British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan escalates. [91013]
Des Browne [holding answer 13 September 2006]: As a matter of course, the Government, with their international partners where appropriate maintains a range of contingency plans for all operational theatres where UK troops are deployed, including Iraq and Afghanistan.
Joint Personnel Administration
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many RAF personnel were affected by pay inaccuracies in June 2006. [88162]
Derek Twigg: In the June 2006 pay run 485 RAF personnel, just over one per cent. of the RAF population were affected by inaccuracies, primarily in respect of specialist pay.
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 25 July 2006, Official Report, column 1538W, on Joint Personnel Administration, how many complaints the Armed Forces Joint Personnel Administration Agency’s internal complaints system received in each month since March 2006 in regard to mispayment under the system; and how many (a) are still outstanding and (b) have been resolved. [90950]
Derek
Twigg [holding answer 13 September 2006]: The
following table contains the number of complaints received, resolved
and outstanding, under the Armed Forces Joint Personnel Administration
Agency’s internal complaints system, for each month since April
2006. There are no figures for March as the first JPA Pay Run was in
April. Additional resources have been
allocated to address the outstanding complaints with a target date of 1
October 2006 for their reduction of the backlog to a normal level of
work in
hand.
| Month | Total( 1) | Resolved | Outstanding |
| (1)
The vast majority of complaints involve mispayments. At present it is
not possible to differentiate between the types of complaint and
therefore there may be some included that do not fall into this
category. (2) As at 8 September 2006. | |||
Landing Ships Dock (Auxiliary) Project
Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he plans to publish the findings of his Department’s lessons learned study following the decision to terminate the contract with Swan Hunter for the Landing Ships Dock (Auxiliary) Project. [90934]
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 13 September 2006]: Preparations have begun for the lessons learned review into the Landing Ship Dock (Auxiliary) project. It is intended to make the outcome of the findings publicly available, after the National Audit Office have conducted their value for money study into the project.
Low Flying Aircraft
Mr. Walter: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many complaints concerning low flying aircraft activity in North Dorset have been recorded in the last 12 months; and what plans he has to minimise the disturbance caused by low flying military aircraft. [90928]
Derek Twigg [holding answer 13 September 2006]: Over the period 1 September 2005 to 31 August 2006, 143 complaints have been recorded with the location given as "Dorset".
Low flying training is always conducted in such a way as to minimise, as far as possible, disturbance to those on the ground. To this end operations by fast jet aircraft in the low flying system are restricted in terms of both minimum height and maximum speed, and transit flying by helicopters is conducted at a minimum of 100 feet, unless specially authorised.
Medals
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) which (a) individual and (b) organisation was responsible for deciding that the qualifying period for the award of the Naval General Service Medal and/or clasp for Canal Zone service would not be fulfilled by 30 days’ aggregated service; and when that decision was taken; [65386]
(2) for what reasons the criterion for awarding the Suez Canal Zone Naval General Service Medal and/or clasp requires the 30-day qualifying period of service in the zone to have been continuous. [65389]
Derek Twigg [holding answer 27 April 2006]: A sub-committee of the Committee on the Grant of Honours Decorations and Medals, which is an inter-departmental committee administered on behalf of the Government by the ceremonial Secretariat of the Cabinet Office, took the decision on the qualifying service required for an award of the Naval General Service Medal and/or clasp for Canal Zone service. It is not possible to respond to the detailed questions, as MOD is not the holder of this committee’s records.
Middle East
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what categories of military material have been transported from the US to Israel via the UK since1 January; and whether these included depleted uranium material. [90969]
Des Browne [holding answer 13 September 2006]: The Government routinely withholds details of Dangerous Air Cargo transported as this would be prejudicial to international relations and UK Defence interests.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the UN on the possibility of the UK providing manpower to the multilateral force in the Lebanon. [91007]
Des Browne [holding answer 13 September 2006]: We have been in continual discussion with the UN regarding UK contributions to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
At a United Nations meeting held in New York on 17 August 2006 to scope support for an expanded UNIFIL, attended by over 50 countries, we identified a range of UK air and maritime assets and other military facilities, which could potentially be called on to support UN operations in Lebanon, depending on the UN's requirements. On 7 September 2006 we received a letter from Kofi Annan formally requesting UK maritime assistance for the interim maritime task force. HMS York is now assisting the Italian-led interim maritime taskforce.
Subject to the approval of the Government of Lebanon, there is strong international support for the UK to lead an interim cell in Lebanon to co-ordinate support to the Lebanese armed forces and Security Sector Reform (SSR). In parallel, there will be a need to work with international partners to establish a longer term international SSR structure.
Mr. Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what (a) nature and (b) extent of UK armed forces involvement is in the international peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon. [91021]
Des Browne [holding answer 13 September 2006]: The UK is contributing HMS York to the Temporary Naval Task Force requested by the UN, which is patrolling off the coast of Lebanon. The force, led by the Italians, will remain in place until relieved by a German led UN Task Force in four weeks time.
Subject to the approval of the Government of Lebanon, there is strong international support for the UK to lead an interim cell in Lebanon to co-ordinate support to the Lebanese armed forces and Security Sector Reform.
There are no plans for further contributions.
Military Equipment
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what equipment belonging to the UK armed forces was positioned within five miles of the village of Southmoor, Oxfordshire on (a) 17 and (b) 18 July 2003. [85523]
Des Browne [holding answer 14 July 2006]: We do not maintain records of the location of individual pieces of military equipment with a precision sufficient to answer the Question. There are no defence establishments located within a five mile radius of Southmoor, although there is an Army site at Abingdon, around seven miles by road from the village. 612 Volunteer Gliding School is also based at Abingdon and provides cadets with gliding instruction, usually at the weekend; records indicate that flying did not take place on the dates in question.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |