|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many licensed premises are still to receive a paper licence in (a) Guildford, (b) Surrey and (c) England; and if she will make a statement. 
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment her Department has made of the (a) cost and (b) environmental effect of using plastic glasses in licensed premises; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Woodward: The Department has made no assessment of the costs or environmental impact of using plastic drinking vessels. It is for individual licensed premises to decide whether to use alternatives to glassware.
The use of plastic containers and toughened glass can help promote the licensing objectives of public
safety and the prevention of crime and disorder. However, as the Secretary of State's guidance to licensing authorities makes clear, such conditions should only be imposed where necessary and should take into account factors such as the location, style of the venue and the activities carried on there.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment her Department has made of the conclusions of the Licensing Review Panel; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Woodward: We are continuing to assess all of the panels detailed conclusions and recommendations and will provide a response in due course. Before reaching a final decision on any changes to the fees regime and related issues, we will undertake a full public consultation so all stakeholders have the opportunity to inform future policy.
Anne Snelgrove: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what mechanisms exist under the Licensing Act 2003 to review the licence of licence holders charged with offences who do not declare that they hold a licence at the time of the legal proceedings. 
Mr. Woodward [holding answer 20 April 2007]: Under the 2003 Act, it is the responsibility of a personal licence holder when charged with a relevant offence to inform the court he holds a personal licence and to produce it to the court. If he fails to do so, without reasonable excuse, the defendant commits an offence under the Act and on conviction, he would be liable to a fine of up to £500. This offence is also a relevant offence under Schedule 4 to the Act and therefore, on conviction, the court would be able to consider either suspension or forfeiture of the personal licence.
(2) how much of the additional £600 million of security costs for the 2012 Olympics she announced in her statement to the House on 15 March 2007 is to be allocated to (a) on-site security, (b) wider security and (c) policing costs during the Games themselves; 
I refer the hon. Member to the statement I made to the House on 15 March 2007, Official Report, column 450, on progress towards the Olympic Games and the Paralympics in 2012. This included reference to an allocation of £600 million, within the overall budget, for wider security, on top of
the Olympic Delivery Authority budget for site security. This figure also excludes the cost of security inside the venues during the Games, which is the responsibility of the London Organising Committee.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the total estimated cost to the Metropolitan Police is of controlling any increase in crime during the Olympic Games in 2012. 
Tessa Jowell: The Home Office and Olympic Security Co-ordinator are developing and costing the security and planning operation for the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games in 2012, including the costs for the Metropolitan Police. This will be published when appropriate.
Mr. Woodward: The BBC has statutory responsibility for the administration of the television licensing system and TV Licensing carries out the day to day administration under contract to the Corporation. I have therefore asked the BBC's Head of Revenue Management to consider the questions raised by the hon. Member and to write direct to him. Copies of the reply will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what resources were allocated by his Department to Conduct After Capture training in each of the last six years; and what personnel were allocated to providing this training over the same period, broken down by grade; 
(2) he will make a statement on the Conduct After Capture training provided by the armed forces; and how many of those hostages recently released from Iranian custody received Conduct After Capture training; 
Peter Viggers: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what (a) instructions and (b) training are given to armed forces personnel in preparation for the possibility that they may find themselves held against their will by a foreign power or hostile organisation. 
Des Browne [holding answer 19 April 2007]: UK military personnel receive different levels of training into Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Extraction (SERE) techniques depending on their mission. Personnel who are at greater risk of capture receive enhanced training. I am withholding details on the specific nature of the training because this would, or would be likely, to prejudice the capacity, effectiveness and security of our armed forces.
I announced on 16 April 2007, Official Report, columns 23-26, that Lieutenant General Sir Rob Fulton Royal Marines will lead an inquiry into the recent incident in which Iran illegally detained 15 UK service personnel. This inquiry will examine SERE training alongside the other operational aspects of the incident. It would therefore be inappropriate for me to comment further until this inquiry is complete.
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 13 February 2007, Official Report, column 203W, on armed forces: housing, which personnel are included in the group other. 
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has made to United Kingdom media on the (a) advisability and (b) propriety of their offering financial inducements to serving military personnel to give interviews about their experiences on operations. 
Mr. David Hamilton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) for what reason the service personnel held captive in Iran were given permission to receive payment in return for statements to the media about their experiences; 
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) which (a) Ministers, (b) military officers and (c) civilian officials (i) were consulted about and (ii) took the decision to permit serving military personnel who had been captured by Iran to sell their stories to the media; 
(2) what assessment he made before the decision was taken to allow serving military personnel to sell their stories to the media, of the effects of the making of such payments on (a) the morale of (i) injured service personnel, (ii) bereaved service families and (iii) other serving military personnel who have not received comparable sums and (b) the public perception of the armed services. 
Mr. David Hamilton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what (a) support and (b) guidance is offered to military personnel when granted permission to enter into financial arrangements with media organisations. 
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the criteria have been since 1997 for deciding whether to grant permission for serving military personnel (a) to have accounts published and (b) to sell media interviews about their experiences on operations; and how many instances there have been since 1997 of second-hand accounts of such experiences being sold to the media by relatives of military personnel who were still serving. 
Des Browne [holding answer 18 April 2007]: Provisions governing service personnel who wish to communicate with the media are contained in Queens Regulations for the Armed Forces and a Defence Council Instruction published in October 2004. These, along with the support and guidance offered to military personnel in such circumstances, are currently under review, as I explained in my statement on 16 April 2007, Official Report, columns 23-26.
[holding answer 18 April 2007]: On Thursday 12 April 2007 I was in Quebec to attend a meeting of Defence Ministers to discuss the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan. The Minister for Defence Equipment and Support, Lord Drayson, was in
London and attended a dinner of the Air Force Board that evening. The Minister for the Armed Forces and the Under-Secretary of State were each on leave.
Des Browne: On 5 April, I was in office in the Ministry of Defence all morning and conducted a number of media interviews at lunchtime before returning to my constituency. I had no official engagements from Good Friday (6 April) until Easter Monday (9 April) but received regular updates on operational issues, as usual. I made a routine telephone call to the Australian Defence Minister on the evening of 9 April to discuss a range of operational issues. The only official engagement by my ministerial colleagues was one by the Under-Secretary of State and Minister for Veterans, who visited the Royal College of Defence Medicine at Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham on the afternoon of 5 April to visit service personnel.
Derek Twigg: Expenditure on alcohol at public expense is governed by the general principles of financial propriety set out in Government Accounting and the MODs own regulations for the provision of official entertainment promulgated in Joint Service Publication 462 (Financial Management Policy Management Manual). The provision of alcohol must, at all times, be in moderation and constitute an admissible charge to the Defence Budget.
Mr. Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what equipment was seized by Iran during the capture of the 15 Royal Navy personnel; and whether any or all of the equipment has been returned. 
Des Browne: The equipment seized by Iranians during the capture of the 15 Royal Naval personnel consisted of: two Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats, seven carbines, four rifles, 10 pistols and ammunition, communications and navigation systems, body armour, helmets, goggles and camera equipment. None of this equipment has been returned by the Iranian authorities.
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) which non-military personnel were on the Lynx helicopter which oversaw the boarding of the freighter in Iraqi waters on 23 March 2007; how many hours' flying were left on the Lynx helicopter as from 23 March to its next major service; and for what reason HMS Cornwall did not have a second Lynx helicopter; 
(2) what arms were carried by each of the 15 service personnel prior to their capture by the Iranian authorities on 23 March 2007; and how much ammunition each member of personnel carried during their time on the freighter boarded in Iraqi waters; 
(6) whether any order was given on 23 March 2007 from (a) HMS Cornwall and (b) any senior personnel for the boarding party to return to their boats from the freighter after the sighting of the Iranian speed-boats; 
Des Browne: I refer the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) and the hon. Member for Congleton (Ann Winterton) to the statement I made on 16 April 2007, Official Report, columns 23-26, in which I stated that there would be an inquiry, lead by Lieutenant General Sir Rob Fulton Royal Marines (Retd), into this incident. It would therefore be in appropriate for me to comment further until this inquiry is complete.
Des Browne: Leading Seaman Turney was interviewed by a BBC crew on the evening of 22 March 2007, as were several other members of the ship's crew. The BBC were already onboard HMS Cornwall for a planned visit.
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what review of naval procurement and mothballing plans is to take place following the recent seizure of British military personnel by Iran. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|