| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
18 Mar 2009 : Column 1138W—continued
Data for 2006-07 are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Armed Forces: Manpower
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place a copy of the latest DASA working patterns survey in the Library. [258880]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Arrangements will be made for a copy of the 2007-08 DASA Working Patterns Survey to be placed in the Library of the House shortly.
Armed Forces: Motor Vehicles
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many RB44 heavy utility trucks are in service; and what their expected out of service date is. [263555]
Mr. Quentin Davies: There are currently 496 Truck Utility Heavy (TUH) RB44 vehicles in service. The expected out of service date of the TUH fleet is 2012.
Departmental Data Protection
Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department uses WPA2 encryption protocol on all its wireless networks. [259792]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth:
Information is a key asset to Government and its correct handling is vital to the delivery of public services and to the integrity of HMG. The Security Policy Framework, the Data Handling Report and the National Information Assurance Strategy produced by the Cabinet Office provide a strategic
framework for protecting information that Government handle and put in place a set of mandatory measures which Departments must adhere to.
The Department follows CESG guidance on the use of the Wi-Fi Protected Access 2 (WPA2) communications security protocols in order to protect wireless networks carrying protectively marked (up to RESTRICTED/IL3) traffic. The configuration and operation standards for WPA2 are set out in CESG’s Infosec Manual Y, Use of WPA2 Wireless Security in Government Systems. The Department is also compliant with HMG 1A Standard No 4—Communication, Security and Cryptography for the encryption of data.
Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what auditing his Department undertakes to ensure that IT security policies are being followed; and on how many occasions (a) IT security policies have been breached by employees and (b) a member of staff has been sanctioned for a breach of such policies in the last 12 months. [259793]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Information is a key asset to Government and its correct handling is vital to the delivery of public services and to the integrity of HMG. The Security Policy Framework, the Data Handling Report and the National Information Assurance Strategy produced by the Cabinet Office provide a strategic framework for protecting information that Government handle and put in place a set of mandatory measures which Departments must adhere to.
The Department carries out a compliance regime including self assessment, accreditation, assurance reporting, audit and review to ensure that security policies are followed. IT Security Policies are audited across the MOD at all layers of the organisation. Compliance Inspections are conducted at unit level by security and technical survey teams, augmented by assurance and self assessment activities directed by the principal security advisor’s teams. The Defence Security Safety Assurance Division undertakes functions that provide strategic assurance on the adequacy, efficacy and implementation of the requisite controls and policies for ‘IT Security’, in the form of audits, penetration tests, vulnerability analysis testing and from through life IS Accreditation processes. These provide assurance on the status of the Departments IT Security of both in service equipment and that in development. Additionally the Defence Internal Audit has undertaken a variety of IT Security Audits, both themed and pan-MOD.
Investigations into security incidents are generally dealt with at local unit level and the details of individual breaches of policy by individuals are not recorded centrally; it would not be possible to provide these details without incurring disproportionate cost.
Depending upon the circumstances, a range of sanctions are available including disciplinary or administrative action, and in extreme or persistent cases, termination of employment/services and, if appropriate, criminal proceedings.
Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a copy of his Department’s IT security hierarchy. [259794]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Information is a key asset to Government and its correct handling is vital to the delivery of public services and to the integrity of HMG. The Security Policy Framework, the Data Handling Report and the National Information Assurance Strategy produced by the Cabinet Office provide a strategic framework for protecting information that Government handle and put in place a set of mandatory measures which Departments must adhere to.
It is not in the interest of the security of the Department, or that of the public, to disclose detailed information pertaining to the Department’s security hierarchy. Disclosing such information would enable criminals and those who would attempt to cause disruptive threats to the Department to deduce how to conduct attacks and therefore potentially enhance their capability to carry out such attacks.
Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what scanning for vulnerabilities his Department conducts of each of its IT devices; what method is used for IT device scans; and how many vulnerabilities have been detected as a result of such scans in the last 12 months. [259795]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Information is a key asset to Government and its correct handling is vital to the delivery of public services and to the integrity of HMG. The Security Policy Framework, the Data Handling Report and the National Information Assurance Strategy produced by the Cabinet Office provide a strategic framework for protecting information that Government handle and put in place a set of mandatory measures which departments must adhere to.
It is not in the interest of the security of the Department, or that of the public, to disclose detailed information pertaining to electronic breaches of security of department's IT systems. Disclosing such information would enable criminals and those who would attempt to cause disruptive threats to the department to deduce how to conduct attacks and therefore potentially enhance their capability to carry out such attacks.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to paragraph 1.43 of the Final Report on Data Handling Procedures in Government, June 2008, whether his Department has initiated a specific review into its handling and management of information since June 2008. [263361]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: In response to the Data Handling Procedures in Government and Burton Reviews, the Ministry of Defence has established a dedicated implementation team which has commissioned a range of activities and reviews, including against the emerging Information Assurance Maturity Model, the Department's progress in implementing the recommendations of the reviews.
A separate, more broadly-based review of the Department's Security and Accreditation framework will report shortly.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to paragraph 1.43 of the Final Report on Data Handling Procedures in Government, June 2008, whether his Department has introduced training and awareness programmes for its staff since June 2008. [263362]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Yes. Since June 2008 The Ministry of Defence has significantly enhanced its training and awareness programmes for security and data handling, building on a broader security awareness programme launched in early 2008. The Department has worked closely with the Cabinet Office and other Departments to implement a core Computer Based Training (CBT) package to provide awareness of individuals' responsibilities in handling data, particularly personal data. Data handling training is mandated for all staff, either through the CBT package or, for military staff below the rank of Sergeant/Petty Officer by means either of the CBT or a group briefing.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to paragraph 2.11 of the Final Report on Data Handling Procedures in Government, June 2008, whether his Department has implemented the Information Commissioner's recommendation for privacy impact assessments. [263616]
Future Large Aircraft
Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 5 March 2009, Official Report, column 1723W, on future large aircraft, who is liable under the contract to pay for any costs arising from extra development and deferred delivery dates. [264143]
Mr. Quentin Davies: Under the terms of the existing fixed price contract the supplier is liable for any costs incurred in delivering the required performance levels specified within the contract.
HMS Victory
Mr. Andrew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what archaeological and heritage advice the Disposal Services Agency sought before authorisation was given to Odyssey Marine Exploration to return to the site suspected to be that of HMS Victory to recover guns. [263700]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Following initial notification of the possible location of the wreck of HMS Victory, and after consultation within the Department, agreement was given to Odyssey Marine Exploration for the limited recovery of two cannons to facilitate the process of identification. No consultation took place with external archaeological and heritage advisors at this stage but as I made clear in my answer on 11 February 2009, Official Report, columns 1996-97W, we are now consulting with other Government Departments and English Heritage over the claims that have been made by the company.
Met Office
Mr. Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent discussions Ministers in his Department have had with Treasury Ministers on the future of the Met Office as part of the Government’s Trading Fund Review in advance of the 2009 Budget. [263879]
Mr. Kevan Jones: There have been no recent direct discussions between Defence Ministers and HM Treasury on the future of the Meteorological Office.
Culture, Media and Sport
Departmental Surveys
Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 6 March 2009, Official Report, columns 1892-3W, on departmental surveys, if he will place in the Library a copy of the results of the most recent staff survey undertaken by his Department. [263646]
Mr. Sutcliffe: The last staff survey for DCMS took place in 2007 and the results published on the DCMS website. I will place a copy in the Library.
Swimming
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what research was undertaken in respect of establishing county swimming co-ordinators as referred to in his Department’s publication, Be Active, Be Healthy: a plan for getting the nation moving; [263895]
(2) what mechanisms are in place for county swimming co-ordinators to report their progress in the promotion of swimming in every local area to his Department as set out in his Department’s publication, Be Active, Be Healthy: a plan for getting the nation moving; and if he will make a statement; [263896]
(3) what role he envisages for the county swimming co-ordinators referred to in his Department's publication, Be Active, Be Healthy: a plan for getting the nation moving. [263898]
Dawn Primarolo: I have been asked to reply.
Learning from the Sport England funded Everyday Swim pilots have informed the development of the county swimming co-ordinator package. The county swimming co-ordinators will work closely with County Sport and Physical Activity Partnerships and will be managed through existing reporting and line management mechanisms within the Amateur Swimming Association and will feed into existing cross-government free swimming governance arrangements.
County swimming co-ordinators will offer expert advice and support to local authorities and pool operators helping them to make the most of the Government investment, including increasing and sustaining participation and helping them to deliver in deprived areas and reaching vulnerable groups.
A robust monitoring and evaluation process will be commissioned to support the implementation of this larger scale national pilot.
Television: Advertising
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will estimate the potential size of the UK product placement market. [264220]
Andy Burnham: In December 2005 Ofcom, the regulator for the broadcasting sector, estimated that the potential revenue from product placement could be worth £25 million to £35 million per annum after five years.
A number of respondents to the consultation on the UK implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, conducted between July and October 2008, agreed with the Ofcom estimate. Other respondents put forward far higher estimates of the potential value of product placement. One broadcaster thought the potential value was greatly overstated. The variation in the estimates made by respondents to the consultation indicates that there is a lack of clear evidence about the potential value of product placement and that there is no consensus on the potential size of the UK product placement market.
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what representations he has received as part of the consultation on the implementation in the UK of the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive. [264221]
Andy Burnham: My Department conducted a three month public consultation on the UK implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive between July and October 2008. 59 responses were received. A list of the responses, together with a summary report of the consultation report, are available on the Department’s website at:
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of (a) the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive and (b) the joint industry code in protecting television viewers from product placements; [264222]
(2) what recent assessment he has made of the effect of restrictions on product placement on producers and commercial broadcasters. [264223]
Andy Burnham: We set out our initial assessment of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMS) in the preliminary impact assessments published with our consultation issued on 31 July 2008. This is available on the Department’s website at:
Updated impact assessments will be published later this year, when the Regulations to implement the AVMS Directive are introduced into Parliament.
The Government appreciate the efforts which ITV, PACT and others have made to devise a code of conduct which would mitigate the adverse effects of product placement in UK TV programming were it to be permitted. We have, nevertheless, concluded that there is no firm evidence that the economic benefit of introducing product placement would outweigh the detrimental impact it would have on the quality and standards of British television and viewers’ trust in it.
UK broadcasting regulation has never permitted product placement in television programmes made by and for UK television broadcasters. The Government’s recent statement on the implementation of AVMS confirms that this will remain the case.
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent assessment he has made of the effects of Ofcom's broadcasting code in respect of product placement on television programmes acquired from the US. [264224]
Andy Burnham: Section 10 of the code includes rules governing the inclusion of products and services in television programmes. It prohibits television product placement in general, but excludes from that prohibition the inclusion of products and services in a programme acquired from outside the UK and in films made for cinema provided that no broadcaster regulated by Ofcom and involved in the broadcast of that programme or film directly benefits from the arrangement. It also requires that no undue prominence may be given to a product or service.
UK commercial television broadcasting has always operated under rules of this kind. The rules have ensured that product placement in television programming acquired from the United States is not unduly prominent.
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent discussions he has had with Ofcom on the regulation of product placement in respect of television programmes made in the UK. [264225]
Andy Burnham: Discussions on the regulation of product placement in television programmes made in the UK, as part of the current work on the UK implementation of the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive, are an important part of my Department's work with Ofcom. These discussions will continue.
Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment he has made of the effect on the independent production sector of the decision to restrict product placement. [264338]
Andy Burnham: We set out our initial assessment of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMS) in the preliminary impact assessments published with our consultation issued on 31 July 2008. This is available on the Department’s website at:
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |