| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
8 Jan 2007 : Column 85W—continued
Ex-services Personnel: Welfare Support
Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what support his Department (a) provides directly and (b) gives to third parties for the provision of welfare support services for ex-service personnel. [109821]
Derek Twigg: In addition to the high quality resettlement, pension and compensation provisions for those leaving the armed forces, the MOD provides a range of welfare support services for ex-service personnel including the War Pensioners Welfare Service which can offer advice, guidance and practical help to War Disablement Pensioners and War Widows/Widowers. In cases of death in service, the bereaved family is allocated a visiting officer by the services to help the family and act as a link to the various civilian, charitable and other service support agencies. The Veterans Agency Helpline and website also provide a signposting service for all ex-service personnel and their relatives, offering advice on a range of issues affecting veterans.
The support MOD gives to third party organisations in providing welfare support to ex-service personnel includes funding towards the War Widow/ers Pilgrimage Scheme and the Polish Ex-Servicemen/Servicewomen Grant in Aid scheme both of which are managed by the Royal British Legion. Under the War Pensions Scheme, the MOD also funds the individual costs of war pensioners undergoing “remedial treatment” at treatment centres run by the Ex-Service Mental Welfare Society (Combat Stress) for conditions related to their individual pensioned disablement. Through the Veterans Challenge Fund, the Department also funds a number of projects run by service charities and others designed to improve the information available to service leavers on help available or, more directly, to meet welfare needs in areas such as homelessness.
Gershon Review
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much has been spent by his Department and its associated public bodies in order to achieve Gershon efficiency savings; whether these costs have been included in reporting headline efficiency savings; and if he will make a statement. [108351]
Derek Twigg: Information on how much MOD has spent in total to achieve Gershon efficiency savings is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Sir Peter Gershon’s independent report into public sector efficiency did not require that efficiencies be recorded net of upfront investment costs and MOD has followed this advice.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much efficiency savings have been made in his Department and agencies as a result of the Gershon review; and if he will make a statement. [108353]
Derek Twigg: The Ministry of Defence has a target of £2.8 billion of annual efficiency gains by the end of the three year spending review 2004 period. Details of progress towards this target have been published in the Ministry of Defence autumn performance report.
Gurkhas
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many UK Gurkha troops were deployed at RAF Fairford during the period that the base was operational in the spring of 2003. [109876]
Mr. Ingram: This information is not held centrally and can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Helicopters
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) in service, (b) fit for purpose and (c) available for immediate deployment helicopters there are in the (i) Royal Navy, (ii) RAF and (iii) Army Air Corps, broken down by type of helicopter. [110436]
Mr. Ingram: The total number of helicopters in service with Joint Helicopter Command's Forward Fleet as at 18 December 2006 and the average fit for purpose figures for November 2006 are shown in the following table.
| Aircraft type | Forward fleet | Fit for purpose |
The helicopters in service with the Royal Navy's Forward Fleet and the average fit for purpose figures for November 2006 are shown in the following table.
| Aircraft type | Forward fleet | Fit for purpose |
The number of RAF Sea King Helicopters in service and the average fit for purpose figures for November 2006 are shown in the following table.
| Aircraft type | Forward fleet | Fit for purpose |
All averages in all tables have been rounded to the nearest whole number.
All helicopters deemed fit for purpose are available for deployment.
All UK helicopters are deemed fit for purpose if they are capable of undertaking the required task on a given day. Helicopters are not available for tasking if they are undergoing scheduled maintenance, modification programmes or any unforeseen rectification work that can arise on a day-to-day basis. The figures do not reflect the fact that a helicopter assessed as not fit for purpose may be returned to the front line at very short notice to meet the operational need.
Infantry: Target Strength
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the (a) establishment and (b) strength of each Scottish infantry battalion (i) is and (ii) was at 1 April 2006; and what the forecast is for 31 March 2007 in each case. [107871]
Derek Twigg: The figures in the following tables show the strengths and establishments of the Infantry Scottish Division by Battalion as at 1 April 2006 and 1 August 2006 (the last date for which data was compiled).
The Army Manpower Forecasting process does not model or forecast to battalion levels.
Iraq
Dr. Richard Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many servicemen have been discharged from the services as disabled following the Iraq conflict. [106316]
Derek Twigg: Data for the number of UK Regular Service personnel discharged as disabled solely as a result of the Iraq conflict are not centrally held and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Iraqi civilians have been detained by UK forces since the end of hostilities in 2003; and how many are being held. [109869]
Des Browne: Information on internees who have been detained at the Divisional Temporary Detention Facility has been compiled since 1 January 2004.
Records show that up until 18 December 2006 UK forces in Iraq have interned 543 persons. 440 have subsequently been released, 103 remain at the facility; six have had their cases transferred to the Central Criminal Court of Iraq and are therefore criminal detainees, 97 are interned because they continue to pose a threat to security.
These records do not include persons placed from the outset into Iraqi custody, or those released within eight hours of initial detention.
Japan: Former Civilian Internees
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many cases considered by the ex-gratia scheme for former civilian internees of the Japanese have been paid as a consequence of the change to the 20-year residency qualification; how many cases have been rejected on the grounds that the claimant (a) was not interned and (b) did not meet the revised criteria of 20 years; how many of those rejected because the claimant did not meet the revised criteria would have met the criteria if the period of overseas services was as a locally employed staff member was included; how many cases remain to be decided; what progress is being made in establishing the hardship fund; and if he will make a statement. [104574]
Derek Twigg: As at mid-November 2006, 120 claimants had been paid under the Ex Gratia Payment Scheme for former Far East Prisoners of War and civilian internees, on the basis that they met the 20-year residence criterion. Five claims had been rejected on the grounds that the claimant was unable to prove internment. No claims have been rejected for failing to meet the residency criterion; the nine claims that might currently fall into this category are being held pending a review of the way that the criterion is working that I will shortly be undertaking, taking account of the views of the Association of British Civilian Internees Far East Region (ABCIFER). 47 other cases remained under consideration.
Employment overseas can count towards the 20-year qualifying period where there is reasonable evidence that the individual was expected to return to the UK. However, it does not count where there was no
reasonable evidence that they would return to the UK, including cases where the individual was locally employed; this is because the close link to the UK, which is an overall requirement of the scheme, is not considered to have been demonstrated. It would be inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the scheme to allow such service to count and, were we to do so, it would have very significant financial implications for the eligibility criteria for the military side of the scheme.
To respond to concerns that a number of those who do not qualify under the ex gratia scheme may be suffering hardship, officials have investigated the feasibility of providing financial assistance to a charity supporting such individuals. The charity has recently indicated that it is not able to accept the support offered to limitations in the terms of its deeds.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |