|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Wikipedia entries have been (a) created and (b) amended (i) by (A) special advisers, (B) Ministers and (C) communications officials and (ii) from IP addresses of (1) special advisers, (2) Ministers and (3) communications officials in (x) his Department and (y) its agencies since August 2005. 
20th Armoured Brigade (United Kingdom)
Defence Equipment and Support
Defence Logistic Organisation
Defence Procurement Agency
Electronic Chart Display and Information System
Human rights in post-invasion Iraq
Iraq: Transition to Provincial Iraqi Control
RAF High Wycombe
Warship Support Agency
All amendments were made to correct factual inaccuracies and in line with the civil service code. We are not aware of any entries being created by communications officials, created or amended by special advisers or Ministers.
Mr. Kemp: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what make and model of car (a) he and (b) each Minister in his Department selected as their official ministerial car; and what criteria were applied when making the decision in each case. 
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether under the treaty of Lisbon the European Court of Justice will have jurisdiction over any aspect of the UK's foreign and defence policies; and what the definition of common foreign and security is in the Treaty. 
The jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) over the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is explicitly excluded with two limited exceptions. The ECJ will be able to monitor the boundary between the CFSP and other EU external action, as is currently the case; it will, in addition, be able to ensure that the CFSP cannot be affected by other EU policies as a distinct and equal area of action. In addition, individuals who are subject to CFSP sanctions will be able to challenge these in court. Individuals can already challenge economic sanctions to which they are subject and the Government welcome this closing of the gap in the judicial protection of the individual.
The Maastricht treaty established that the Union should define a CFSP covering all areas of foreign and security policy. The treaty of Lisbon reconfirms that the CFSP shall cover all areas of foreign policy and all questions related to the Union's security. It further specifies that the CFSP shall be defined and implemented by the European Council and the Council.
|Market and Opinion Research International Ltd.|
Derek Twigg: 38 Engineer Regiment will relocate to Massereene Barracks in August 2008. HQ NI and 38 (Irish) Brigade is currently reviewing its longer term basing plan. This review will consider the longer term role of Massereene Barracks.
Sir Michael Spicer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he will reply to the letter from the hon. Member for West Worcestershire, dated 24 January, about the Porton Down Servicement Nerve Gas volunteers (Ref: MC00706/2008). 
Hywel Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what contact he has made with the devolved administrations to ensure that child protection measures are in place to protect anyone under 18 whose data were on the laptop recently stolen from a Royal Navy recruiting officer; 
(2) what steps have been taken to ensure that anyone under 18 whose data were on the laptop recently stolen from a Royal Navy recruiting officer are protected from harm by child protection measures. 
Des Browne [holding answer 24 January 2008]: The Department takes very seriously any loss of personal data. My statement on 21 January 2008, Official Report, columns 1225-27 informed the House of the package of measures, reviews and investigations completed or under way to safeguard information held by the Ministry of Defence. Such measures are supplementary to the existing policies and procedures.
As I explained in the House on 21 January 2008, Official Report, column 1235 the loss was a matter for my Department and the UK Government and that if any issue required the involvement of the devolved Administrations they would be told.
In addition, the Department has taken action to assist all those, wherever they live, whose personal data may have been compromised. This includes verification of identity and careful scrutiny to protect personal data from unauthorised access or unlawful processing, including providing banks with the account details (where they were held) in order that the banks can monitor accounts for unauthorised activity. Officials are also in contact with the Department for Work and Pensions, HM Revenue and Customs, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, the Identity and Passport Service and the Border and Immigration Agency. These measures are designed to protect the personal data of
all individuals including those aged under 18. The individuals whom the Department has contacted have also been warned to be vigilant concerning unexpected contacts.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Atomic Weapons Establishment has received information from the US on a special material known in the US as Fogbank; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the written answer of 7 March 2008, Official Report, column 2850W, on RAF Halton: complaints, how many individuals lodged complaints in each year from 2003 to 2007; and from how many different addresses such complaints originated in each such year. 
Derek Twigg: Data are not held centrally on the number of individuals who have lodged complaints with the Ministry of Defence or Headquarters Air Command known as(Headquarters Personnel and Training Command before April 2007) regarding flying activity at RAF Halton and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
|Number of complaints received by RAF Halton regarding flying activity in each year||Number of individual complainants|
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what obligations in international law on the UK will be created by (a) Article 11(3) and (b) Title V of the Treaty of Lisbon; and how they will be enforced. 
The duty of loyal co-operation as described in Article 11(3) (Article 24(3)) in the consolidated version of the treaties (as amended by Lisbon) is not new. It was introduced by the Maastricht treaty and it has not prevented the UK from pursuing its own foreign policy when required to. The language is identical to that currently used in Article 11(2) of the EU treaty with the addition of the phrase that member states shall
comply with the Union's action in this area. The latter is a statement of the obvious point that whenand only whenmember states decide on Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) action they must abide by what they agreea point which is already reflected in current EU treaty provisions on the CFSP.
Title V of the treaty of Lisbon sets out the general provisions on the Union's external action and specific provisions on the CFSP. The CFSP will remain intergovernmental: when EU members all agree, we act together, but where we do not, the UK acts independently.
The European Court of Justice will not have jurisdiction over the CFSP, except for those limited areas set out in the answer I gave to the hon. Member today (UIN 191936). And the Commission will not be able to commence infraction proceedings against member states under Title V.
Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent discussions his Department has held with the Health and Safety Executive on the reporting of abnormal incidents at Atomic Energy Authority sites at (a) Aldermaston and (b) Burghfield. 
Des Browne: The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) sites at Aldermaston and Burghfield are owned by the MOD. The nuclear site licensee is AWE plc, which manages these sites under Government Owned/Contractor Operated arrangements. Safety is paramount to all stakeholders. MOD officials maintain a continuous dialogue with AWE plc and the external regulator, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, which is part of the Health and Safety Executive. This dialogue covers all AWE regulatory matters, including the reporting of abnormal incidents.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether his Department has received (a) evidence of and (b) representations about (i) cattle dying, (ii) deformed cattle foetuses and (iii) ill health of local residents related to toxic landfill at Brofiscin Quarry. 
Mr. Paul Murphy:
This matter is within the devolved responsibility of the Welsh Assembly government. However, I understand, in the course of its investigations at Brofiscin Quarry under part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the Environment Agency has collected
and received a significant amount of information about the site. This has included information relating to cattle mortality and deformed cattle foetuses reported in the vicinity of the site in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
The Environment Agency has received correspondence from a local resident about potential ill health effects related to Brofiscin Quarry. It is the responsibility of the Rhondda Cynon Taf county borough council to investigate and respond to public health related matters.
Mr. Paul Murphy: This matter is within the devolved responsibility of the Welsh Assembly government. However, I understand, the Environment Agency has not made an estimate of the quantity of each contaminant present at Brofiscin Quarry. The contaminants present at the site were deposited in the late 1960s and originated from several different sources. The area of the site which has been determined under part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (approx 1.26 hectares) contains an estimated 72,000m(3) (assuming an average thickness of 5.7m) of mixed waste products.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales on what date (a) his Department was made aware of the illegal dumping of toxic waste at Brofiscin Quarry, (b) the Environment Agency began their investigations, (c) Monsanto provided details to his Department of the substances they placed in the quarry, (d) details of contaminants were provided by Gwnwg Gowan and (e) his Department was made aware of the research conducted by ICI laboratories in Brixham, Guelph University (Canada) and the National Water Quality Laboratory in Duluth; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Paul Murphy: (a) All records relating to the former Welsh Office on this issue have been transferred to the Welsh Assembly government. However, I understand that the Welsh Office was aware of the contamination in 1975 from a report prepared by the Water Pollution Research Laboratory on behalf of the then Department for the Environment.
(b) In March 2005 the Environment Agency began its investigations of Brofiscin Quarry pursuant to the provisions of part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 following designation of the site under the Act as a special site by Rhondda Cynon Taf county borough council. The Environment Agency has been involved in site investigations at Brofiscin Quarry since 2001.
(c) The Environment Agency has, in the course of its inquiries, contacted many individuals and companies. Monsanto has, at various stages in the investigation, provided the Environment Agency with information relating to its involvement with the site.
(d) and (e) Mr. Douglas Gowan has provided the Environment Agency with a significant amount of information on a wide range of issues relating to Brofiscin Quarry since early 2006. This has included details of contaminants and research laboratories.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|