|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Financial Year 2006-07|
|Male||Female||Disabled( 2)||Staff aged 55 and over|
|(1) This includes industrial and non-industrial staff employed by the Ministry of Defence and Trading Funds, but excludes Royal Fleet Auxiliaries and locally engaged civilians. (2) All disability data are self declared by employees. (3) Denotes less than 10. Note: Due to the rounding methods used, totals may not always equal the sum of the parts. When rounding to the nearest 10, numbers ending in 5 have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias. Source: DASA (Civilian).|
|Ministry of Defence : gender, disability and age: 1 April 2007|
1. This includes industrial and non-industrial staff employed by the Ministry of Defence and Trading Funds, but excludes Royal Fleet auxiliaries and locally engaged staff.
2. Disabled personnel as a percentage of total (exe unknown).
3. Due to the rounding methods used, totals may not always equal the sum of the parts. When rounding to the nearest 10, numbers ending in 5 have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias.
Mrs. May: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which advertising and marketing campaigns were run by (a) his Department and (b) its agencies in each of the last five years; which external agencies were involved; and what the cost was of each campaign. 
Derek Twigg: I refer the right hon. Member to the answers I gave on 6 June 2007, Official Report, column 488W and 12 June 2007, Official Report, column 936W, to the hon. Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Grant Shapps).
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the current rate of employer contribution is to each public sector pension scheme for which his Department has responsibility; what the revenue impact would be of capping the employer contribution to each such scheme at 14 per cent.; and if he will make a statement. 
The armed forces pension schemes are non contributory for employees and there is no employers cap on the scheme therefore the issue of a revenue impact resulting from a 14 per cent. cap is theoretical and would incur disproportionate costs to calculate.
Mr. Ingram: Central records indicate that the Ministry of Defence had six directly placed contracts with Remploy that remained extant at some time during the last 12 months. They related to services and products involving the manufacture and supply of combat clothing (including nuclear biological and chemical suits, headover and inner-knitted overalls). The value and costs of each contract are commercially confidential. However, the value band of each contract is indicated in the following table:
|Category||Contract date||Contract number|
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what average number of days per year was taken by staff in his Department as sick leave in each of the last five years for which records are available. 
|Sickness absence rate( 1)|
|(1) Sickness absence rates are based on FTE working days lost. For example, if a full-time employee is sick for seven calendar days, this is five working days lost and five FTE working days lost, and if a part-time employee (working 50 per cent. full-time hours) is sick for seven calendar days, this is five working days lost and two and a half FTE working days lost.|
(2) Excludes Ministry of Defence staff in Trading Funds and Royal Fleet Auxiliaries.
Rates listed are based on a revised Cabinet Office definition for sickness absence which excludes annual leave allowance and bank holidays, and caps FTE sickness absence days across a year to a maximum of 225 days. Recording of absence data against this revised definition has only been carried out since calendar year 2005.
Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the merits of providing British Sign Language (BSL) videos on his departmental website for the benefit of those whose first language is BSL. 
[holding answer 13 June 2007]: The Department is continually seeking to improve and enhance its web content. MOD is currently considering the report of an accessibility assessment of www.mod.uk against the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. The
guidelines do not require BSL videos, but the feasibility of providing them on the departmental website will be assessed.
Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the number of veterans who left the services prior to 1 April 1975 who are eligible to be awarded the Veterans Badge; and how many such veterans have been awarded the badge. 
Derek Twigg: The Ministry of Defence does not have the information required to make an accurate assessment of the number of people entitled to the HM Armed Forces Veterans Badge prior to 1 April 1975. However, it is estimated that the total number of all veterans who will be eligible to apply is around five million.
Mr. Ingram: The information on veterans badges is not held in a format that identifies how many servicemen and women who participated in the Falklands campaign have been issued with a badge. However, I can confirm that 3,015 badges were issued to Falklands veterans who applied for tickets for the Horse Guards Commemorative event on 17 June 2007.
Mr. Ingram: The PANTHER Command and Liaison Vehicle is currently in its demonstration and manufacture phase. The estimated cost of this phase is £201 million and prior to this, the assessment phase was conducted, costing some £2 million. PANTHER has successfully completed Military User Trials and is currently undergoing Reliability Trials.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the status is of the studies (a) TELIC
Civilian Health Study, (b) High Risk Behaviours After Operational Deployments (TELIC), (c) Use of Computer-based Treatment for Depression and (d) Post-discharge Mentoring of Vulnerable Service Leavers; and if he will place a copy of each in the Library. 
TELIC Civilian Health Studythe study is under way, and is currently scheduled for completion later in 2007.
High Risk Behaviours after Operational Deployments (TELIC)the study is under way, and is currently scheduled for completion later in 2007.
Post-discharge Mentoring of Vulnerable Service Leaversthe study is complete and has been accepted for publication. It should be published later in 2007.
Mr. Ingram: In March 2007 there were some 7,100 UK troops in Iraq which has reduced to currently some 5,500 personnel in theatre. There have been four members of the 1 Battalion, The Rifles deployed to Iraq since March 2007 of which three are still currently in Iraq. All of the troops serving with the Rifles Battalion are issued with Enhanced Combat Body Armour (ECBA) which is standard issue to all troops deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan. Improved Performance Body Armour (known as OSPREY) and Enhanced Personnel Protection Equipment (EPPE) (known as KESTREL) are provided in addition to ECBA and have been designed to protect against specific threats faced by personnel undertaking certain roles. In total there are over 14,000 sets of body armour in theatre.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the replacement costs of military equipment damaged and destroyed owing to use in Iraq since the start of the war (a) in total and (b) for (i) tanks and other armoured vehicles, (ii) aircraft and (iii) helicopters. 
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what methods have been used to decontaminate or dispose of protective clothing used by British military personnel who investigated the remains of Iraqi tanks or other military vehicles disabled by depleted uranium weapons used in the invasion of Iraq. 
Des Browne [holding answer 21 June 2007]: Depleted uranium is a heavy metal used in some anti-armour munitions. While there is no appreciable radiation health risk, it can pose a toxic hazard through inhalation of ingestion of depleted uranium dust, or contamination of open wounds. This risk is relatively low and does not require individual protective clothing to be worn unless personnel are working in contaminated areas for a prolonged period. Advice provided on decontamination during combat operations was that clothing that may have been in contact with depleted uranium should have the dust brushed off in a controlled site while the individuals concerned were still wearing oral-nasal protection and gloves. Once brushed clean, the clothing was to be washed as normal. Thereafter clothing could be worn or disposed of locally as required.
Subsequent monitoring of several hundred UK troops has shown that this advice was effective. Tests have shown no detectable depleted uranium in anyone other than a very small number of troops injured directly by depleted uranium munitions.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|