|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
7 Nov 2006 : Column 1464Wcontinued
In the same period 553 UK military and civilian personnel were aeromedically evacuated from Iraq on medical grounds, whatever the reason. These records do not cover whether the evacuation was a result of friendly fire, enemy action or accident. Work is being done to expand the data recorded for those aeromedically evacuated from Iraq in the future.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many bandsmen from the band of the Royal Marines, Dartmouth, were flown from the UK to Baghdad to play at the Senior British Representatives dinner on 5 July; and what the cost was to public funds; 
(2) who decided to announce the Senior British Military Representative in Iraqs dinner on 5 July at Maude House, Baghdad in the Court and Social column of the Daily Telegraph; and who paid for this announcement; 
(3) what the cost was of the Senior British Military Representatives dinner on 5 July; and who met the costs; 
(4) what contact with the enemy the convoy escorting the band of the Royal Marines, Dartmouth,
encountered on its journey between Baghdad airport and Maude House and back for their performance at the dinner given by the Senior British Military Representative on 5 July; and whether members of the escort on either journey were (a) killed and (b) wounded; 
(5) who escorted the band of the Royal Marines, Dartmouth, from Baghdad airport to Maude House and back for their performance at the dinner on 5 July; and how many soldiers and vehicles were involved in the escort; 
(6) whether the bandsmen from the band of the Royal Marines, Dartmouth, who played at the dinner hosted by the Senior British Military Representative on 5 July, undertook other duties whilst in Iraq; 
(7) whether alcohol was consumed at the dinner given by the senior British Military Representative in Iraq on 5 July at Maude House, Baghdad; what the British military policy is on consumption of alcohol whilst on operation; and whether the bandsmen playing at this event were subject to the operational constraints on alcohol consumption. 
Mr. Ingram: No Royal Marines Bandsmen were flown to Baghdad specifically to play at the dinner held by the Senior British Military RepresentativeIraq (SBMR-I) on 5 July 2006.
The Band of HM Royal Marines Britannia Royal Naval College was tasked to perform a number of engagements to Coalition Forces and the Royal Marines in Baghdad in support of Defence Diplomacy and the Moral Component. Thirty Royal Marines musicians were in Baghdad from 2-10 July 2006 and also gave a number of performances for staff and patients at the coalition military hospital in Baghdad.
The main focus of the Bands visit was to provide support to ceremonial events for military and civil diplomatic officers and the Iraqi Government and raise the profile of the UK element serving in Baghdad. Whilst in theatre, the band was also able to give an additional performance on 5 July 2006 at an event hosted by the SBMR-I, which allowed key coalition military officers to meet and interact with their Iraqi counterparts in a more informal setting. This event was announced in the Court Circular column of the Daily Telegraph by the Royal Marines Corps Secretary with approval of the then SBMR-I, LT General Fry. The cost of the announcement was borne entirely from the non-public, Royal Marines Corps funds.
As the band was already in Baghdad for the primary purpose stated above, there were no extra costs associated with flying the band from the UK for the dinner on 5 July. During its time in Baghdad, the band was escorted by the Protection Force Company (1 Grenadier Guards) whose role is to provide escorts to all visitors and senior military officers working in the Baghdad area. For reasons of operational security I can not reveal how many soldiers and vehicles were involved in the escort. Although I can say that no members of the escort were killed or injured while escorting the band and in fact at no time during their visit did the band or their escort come into any contact with enemy groups.
The cost of the dinner, including alcohol, was £190.68. In general the British military policy is that the consumption of alcohol is at the discretion of
individual commanders and will vary with the operational circumstances. When alcohol is permitted, the normal limit is two cans of beer per person per day. The bandsmen at the event would have been operating within these policy guidelines.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many service personnel were killed in Iraq on 5 July. 
Mr. Ingram: No British service personnel lost their lives in Iraq on 5 July.
Mr. Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on British involvement in setting up the Police Intelligence Unit in Iraq in 2003. 
Mr. Ingram: We have no record of UK personnel being involved in the formation of the Police Intelligence Unit in 2003.
Mr. Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the investigations being carried out by the Royal Military Police into sectarian violence in Basra. 
Mr. Ingram: There are no investigations being carried out by British Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch into sectarian violence in Basra.
Mr. Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many international police trainers there are at the Joint Training Academy in Basra; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ingram: All training is now carried out by Iraqi trainers at the Basra Training College (previously known as the joint Training Academy) in Basra, which will eventually be handed over to full Iraqi control. There are approximately 40 international police advisers currently at the Basra Training College, 12 of whom are provided by the UK, conducting mentoring in training and management.
Mr. Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether any of the people whose names have been supplied by British intelligence agents to personnel in the Basra police service have subsequently been murdered; 
(2) whether British intelligence agents have supplied lists of suspects to personnel in the Basra police; 
(3) whether British intelligence agents have been based at the Jamiyat police station in Basra. 
Mr. Ingram: It is not our policy to comment on intelligence matters as to do so would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness and security of those forces.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a list of those correspondents deployed in Iraq who (a) have been awarded the Iraq campaign medal and (b) have refused
it; to which agency each was attached; and which have been awarded without clasp. 
Derek Twigg: The Ministry of Defence has received 74 requests for the Iraq campaign medal, of which 69 had been distributed to the recipients as at 25 October 2006. The remaining five are held pending collection or confirmation of required postal address.
Entitled persons were notified of their entitlement and invited to submit an application for the medal, therefore none actually refused. Five entitled war correspondents did notify the MOD that they did not wish to be considered for the award; the remaining 57 did not respond. In accordance with data protection regulations I am unable to disclose the individual names and media organisations involved.
All 74 applicants were awarded the medal and clasp as they qualified on the basis of the dates of their assignments and locations.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British military personnel have been (a) injured and (b) killed in the Iraqi conflict since it began; and how many and what percentage of those killed have had inquests completed. 
Mr. Ingram [holding answer 23 October 2006]: The Ministry of Defence publishes data on battle and non-battle casualties that have resulted from our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, dating from March 2003 for Iraq. The best centrally available casualty statistics can be found on the Ministry of Defence website:
For the period from March 2003 to 31 December 2005, 230 UK military and civilian personnel were treated at UK medical facilities in Iraq for wounds received as a result of hostile action.
Separate records, from notification of casualty reporting (NOTICAS), show that some 40 UK military and civilian personnel have been categorised as very seriously injured (VSI) from all causes, and that some 70 personnel have been categorised as seriously injured (SI) from all causes. These figures include personnel treated for wounds received as a result of hostile action.
Up to 4,000 UK military and civilian personnel (including a small number of Iraqis) have been medically evacuated from Iraq on medical grounds, whatever the reason.
The total number of UK military and civilian personnel who were treated at the Shaibah Role 3 Field Hospital was 6,609. Of these 226 were categorised as wounded in action, including as a result of hostile action, and 6,383 were categorised as suffering disease or non-battle injury.
Since the beginning of the year, we have sought to collect better information. Between 1 January and 30 September 2006 centrally available records show that:
47 UK military and civilian personnel were admitted to the Shaibah Role 3 Facility in Iraq and categorised as wounded in action, including as a result of hostile action.
855 UK military and civilian personnel were admitted to the Shaibah Role 3 Facility for disease or non battle injuries.
553 UK military and civilian personnel were aeromedically evacuated from Iraq on medical grounds, whatever the reason.
It is with very deep regret that I can confirm that as of 1 November 2006 a total of 120 British forces personnel have died, or are missing presumed dead, while serving on Operation Telic since the start of the campaign in March 2003. Of these, 90 are classed as killed in action, including as a result of hostile action, 30 are known to have died either as a result of illness, non-combat injuries or accidents or have not yet been officially assigned a cause of death, pending the outcome of an investigation. These figures may change as inquests are concluded.
The MOD does not keep records centrally on the number of completed inquests, as this is a matter for the coroner and the Department for Constitutional Affairs. I refer the hon. Member to the ministerial statement made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Constitutional Affairs, 12 October 2006, Official Report, column 26WS, in which she referred to completed inquests.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information has been provided to the World Health Organisation on the location of depleted uranium munitions in Iraq in (a) 1991 and (b) since March 2003. 
Mr. Ingram: The Ministry of Defence is committed to making available information on the use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions both in the UK and abroad. I am not aware of any enquiries from the World Health Organisation (WHO) on the location of DU munitions in Iraq. However, information is available in the public domain and has been provided to other agencies of the United Nations (UN), such as the UN Environment Programme.
The UN has been given information on the weight of DU expended by UK forces in 2003 and on the geographical locations of the firings. They have also been given a report of the findings of an environmental monitoring survey undertaken by my Officials in Iraq in June 2003. This survey found only very low levels of DU contamination close to the points where DU munitions had impacted. No contamination was detectable in the wider environment even when the most sensitive analytical techniques were used; the contamination was not considered to present a health risk. This information was presented to a group of Iraqi and UN scientists at a meeting in June 2005. A representative from the WHO was present at this meeting.
In addition, the Ministry of Defence has published information on the very limited use of 120 mm DU munitions by UK units during the 1990/1991 Gulf conflict.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessments were undertaken by NATO allies of Israels compliance with international law on human rights prior to the signing of the individual co-operation programme agreement. 
Mr. McCartney: I have been asked to reply.
Membership of NATOs Mediterranean Dialogue or Istanbul Co-operation Initiative is the only requirement for countries wishing to have an Individual Co-operation Programme (ICP) with NATO. Prior to the signature of the ICP in October individual, allies may, as the UK did, have taken into account among other factors Israels compliance with international human rights law.
Mr. Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many and what percentage of information technology projects undertaken by or for his Department since 2001 have been delivered (a) over budget, (b) after their original deadline, (c) on budget, (d) under budget, (e) on their original deadline and (f) ahead of their original deadline; 
(2) which web-related information technology projects cost his Department more than £500,000 since 2001; which companies submitted qualified tender proposals for each project; and which company was awarded each contract; 
(3) which non-web-related information technology projects cost his Department more than £1 million since 2001; how many qualified tender proposals there were for each project; and which company was awarded each contract; 
(4) how much his Department has spent on (a) equipment and (b) consultants for (i) information technology and (ii) web-facing information technology projects in each year since 2001. 
Derek Twigg: This information is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his Departments five most expensive (a) web and (b) non-web information technology projects have been since 2001. 
Mr. Ingram: Much of this information is not held centrally and could therefore be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, we can provide the following information on the five largest information technology projects, but it does not distinguish between web and non-web information technology projects.
|Contract||Originally estimated cost (£ million)||Most recently estimated cost (£ million)||Outturn (£ million)||Comments|
Expenditure does not include expenditure from other areas within the Department that call up SATCOM services. Most recent cost reflects revised contract to include a third satellite and a fourth satellite in the event of the failure at the launch stage of one of the three satellites. Should there be no loss the cost will reduce to £3,273 million.
This relates to the Increment 1 contract only Increments 2 and 3 have not yet been let.
These estimates comprise all extramural costs for JPA and include the cost of personnel administration services using JPA up to the end of financial year 2008-2009. Outturn costs cover extramural expenditure to the end of financial year 2005-2006. JPA cost estimates are under review and are very likely to increase, subject to formal approval of adjustments to the programme and its contract to ensure alignment with the DII project.
Costs for the MIS system (JAMES 1) supporting WFM. This is based on a six year contract with the Prime Systems Integrator. There is an option to extend by a further four years but the decision has not made yet.
| Note: Purely voice communications systems are not considered to fall within the scope to the question.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|