| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9 Mar 2009 : Column 173W—continued
Defence
Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost is of the upgrade of the MAN support trucks used for operations in Afghanistan; and where the principal place of manufacture is for his Department’s order of MAN support trucks. [261026]
Mr. Quentin Davies: To date, the cost of the upgrade for the support vehicles to theatre entry standard for operational use in Afghanistan is £18 million (excluding VAT).
The vehicle chassis and running gear are manufactured in Austria and the final vehicle integration, a significant part of the contract equating to approx 50 per cent. of the manufacturing process, is undertaken in the UK.
Armed Forces: Absence Without Leave
Mr. Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what reasons are most frequently identified as causing service personnel to be absent without leave; and if he will make a statement. [259492]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Information on reasons identified as causing service personnel to be absent without leave is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many service personnel who were absent without leave at some point in each of the last 10 years were subsequently dismissed from each of the armed services. [259502]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The following personnel, who have been absent without leave at some point in the last 10 years, have subsequently been dismissed. The fact that they had been absent without leave was not necessarily the reason for their dismissal.
| Number dismissed from service | |||
| Royal Navy | Army | Royal Air Force | |
| ‘—’ Denotes less than 5 Notes: 1. Data are captured using different methods for each of the three services and the figures are not directly comparable on a tri-service basis. 2. The Royal Navy (RN) figures for this answer were drawn from the centrally held RN Discipline Database and unlike previous returns this table includes charges of AWOL for periods of absence of less than 24 hours. 3. The RN figures include Royal Marines subject to the Naval Discipline Act at the time of the offence. 4. The RN figures do not include personnel who were convicted of AWOL and later dismissed at a hearing with AWOL not recorded as an offence being dealt with at that final trial. 5. The Army figures include only those who were dismissed solely on the basis of AWOL (i.e. there were no other offences) but may include one or more counts of AWOL. They do not include instances where AWOL may have been recorded as subordinate to a more serious offence. 6. The RAF figures are for those personnel reported as AWOL and later dismissed for any reason (i.e. not necessarily as a direct result of being AWOL). | |||
Armed Forces: Training
Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether final approval has been withheld for the second risk reduction activity for the Defence Training Review; [262016]
(2) what activities are planned to be undertaken within the budget of the second package of risk reduction activity for the Defence Training Review; [262017]
(3) what steps the Secretary of State is taking in response to the parliamentary objection to the departmental minute dated 17 February 2009 concerning a contingent liability for the costs associated with the defence training review. [262068]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Final approval has not been withheld, however, this underwriting activity will not go live until the objections have been considered and answered in accordance with established procedure. I refer the hon. Member to my answer on 2 March 2009, Official Report, columns 1364-65W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Andrew Mackinlay). This answer was in response to his Point of Order raised on 24 February 2009, Official Report, column 169, and also his Early Day Motion 872. I am writing to the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) to address his Point of Order, also on 24 February and will place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.
The planned activities, to further develop the training solution and advance the new facility design and planning process, will ensure the most effective programme is let at contract signature. They will:
Enable essential building design work which is a precondition of a successful planning application.
Ensure the design work improves our understanding of the quality and standard of the new sustainable estate.
Improve confidence over costs through minimising the risk of cost growth and managing other risks.
Seek to reduce the training estate footprint and ensure the most efficient match of facilities to the training solution and assets.
Commence essential environmental survey work to support the planning application and maintain MOD's role as a good estate steward.
Mitigate against further programme delay and maintain key construction and new service start dates.
Reduce risk through increased exposure of Metrix to current MOD training practice and processes.
Identify further opportunities for training rationalisation and harmonisation.
Develop the plans for flexible and distance learning and the introduction of improved individual leaning techniques.
Enable quicker and more efficient reduction in military manpower, releasing personnel to the Front Line Commands following contract signature.
Develop the proposals to reduce residential student numbers and increase student ‘Pass on Time’ rates.
These activities will ensure that project momentum is maintained and planning application timescales achieved. They also aim to make sure costs are controlled to achieve an affordable, acceptable and deliverable project and to obtain maximum value for money for the taxpayer.
Armoured Fighting Vehicles
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the time taken for a fully kitted-out soldier to exit the Panther Command and Liaison Vehicle. [261027]
Mr. Quentin Davies: During trials the approximate times taken for a soldier wearing full Osprey body armour to exit a Panther command and liaison vehicle or a Panther theatre entry standard vehicle were as follows:
Exit through any door: five seconds.
Exit through any hatch: two minutes.
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Panther Command and Liaison vehicle will be fitted with a rear exit. [261028]
Mr. Quentin Davies: The Panther command and liaison vehicle has two rear doors and one rear hatch. The Panther theatre entry standard vehicle for operations in Afghanistan has two rear doors and two rear hatches.
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much weight has been added to the Panther Command and Liaison vehicle since the original specification. [261029]
Mr. Quentin Davies: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave her on 26 November 2008, Official Report, column 1528W.
Courts Martial
Mrs. Humble: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the rules are governing attendance at court martial proceedings for (a) relatives of the accused, (b) victims or relatives of victims, (c) properly interested parties, (d) legal representatives of interested parties, (e) representatives of Ministry of Defence, (f) members of the press and (g) members of the public. [261246]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The rules governing the attendance at courts martial proceedings are the same as those for Crown court proceedings. Courts martial are open proceedings and can be attended by all those identified in the question.
Mrs. Humble: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what mechanisms are in place (a) for listing court martial proceedings and (b) to make court martial listings available to (i) interested parties, (ii) the press and (iii) online search engines. [261247]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Listing of courts martial proceedings is undertaken by the Military Court Service as directed by the Judge Advocate-General or a Judge Advocate. Public notices, giving details of proceedings, are posted at the relevant Military Court Centre and at the defendant’s unit.
In addition, consideration is being given to publishing appropriate listing information on the internet on a new Military Court Service website.
European External Action Service
Dr. Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) defence attachés and (b) military representatives will be appointed to the European External Action Service from (i) the UK and (ii) other EU member states. [261357]
Mr. Hutton: There have not yet been any detailed discussions on the organisation and functioning of the proposed European External Action Service (EEAS). The decision to launch the EEAS would not be taken until after the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, but its possible creation would have no impact on the ability of national Defence Attaches and Military Representatives to perform their bilateral responsibilities.
Iraq: Peacekeeping Operations
Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many individuals UK forces have detained in Iraq outside Multi-National Division South East during Operation TELIC. [260502]
Mr. Hutton [holding answer 3 March 2009]: I refer the hon. Member to the statement I made on 26 February 2009, Official Report, column 394, where I made it clear that individuals captured outside Multi-National Division South East will not feature in data released by the Ministry of Defence.
Property Tax (Ascension) Ordinance
Mr. Kemp: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what mechanisms his Department has in place to ensure compliance with the Property Tax (Ascension) Ordinance of 2002. [261339]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The Ministry of Defence is currently in discussion with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on the amount of property tax MOD should pay to the Ascension Island Government.
RAF Menwith Hill
Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many hon. Members have visited RAF Menwith Hill in each of the last 10 years. [260240]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: All requests by MPs to visit RAF Menwith Hill are referred to the office of the Secretary of State for Defence. Due to national security considerations, such visits are normally restricted to those with an official oversight function such as Government Ministers and members of the all-party Intelligence and Security Committee.
Since 1999 visits to RAF Menwith Hill by Government Ministers and members of the all-party Intelligence and Security Committee were:
| Visitors | |
The Shadow Spokesman for Defence also visited RAF Menwith Hill in 2001.
Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) US service personnel, (b) US contractors, (c) US civilians, (d) Royal Air Force personnel, (e) Ministry of Defence Policy agency personnel, (f) Ministry of Defence Guarding Service personnel, (g) UK army personnel, (h) UK naval personnel, (i) GCHQ personnel, (j) UK contractors, (k) UK civilians, (l) US military chaplains and (m) UK military chaplains are working at Menwith Hill. [260261]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: As at 3 March 2009 the following personnel were employed at RAF Menwith Hill:
| Employer | Number |
| (1) The number of UK contractors’ personnel working at RAF Menwith Hill may vary on a day to day basis. | |
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |