Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what analyses he has undertaken on the nature and origin of the component parts of improvised explosive devices found in Afghanistan. [271392]
Mr. Hutton: In order to protect UK forces, analysis and assessment of the threat posed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Afghanistan continues to receive the highest priority. We routinely analyse IED incidents that occur in Afghanistan, in close consultation with our ISAF partners. I cannot comment further on this type of work as its disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the role of UK forces is in assisting the Afghanistan government to deliver its anti-corruption strategy; and what assessment he has made of their effectiveness in carrying out that role. [270097]
Mr. Hutton: UK forces do not play a role in anti-corruption activity in Afghanistan. However, on 15 December 2008, Official Report , column 819, the Prime Minister announced to Parliament a multi agency anti-corruption taskforce to assist the Afghan Government in tackling corruption.
The taskforce is currently agreeing a strategy focused on prevention and political will; enforcement; and accountability. The task force liaises regularly with the Afghan High Office of Oversight, which is the Afghan lead anti-corruption institution, and other relevant Afghan institutions.
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for troop deployments to Afghanistan in the next 12 months. [271355]
Mr. Hutton: In December 2008, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister announced a temporary uplift in UK force levels in Afghanistan to bring our deployment to around 8,300 troops.
At the NATO summit the Prime Minister announced an increase in troop numbers on a temporary basis to provide additional security during the forthcoming Afghan presidential elections. Further details will be announced in Parliament shortly.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 18 January 2009, Official Report, columns 1015-6W, on modern housing solutions: complaints, how many of the complaints made to Modern Housing Solutions originated in each region. [271256]
Mr. Kevan Jones: The requested information will take a little time to collate and verify. I will write to the hon. Member.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date the infantry rank of (a) private and (b) lance corporal became classed as an operational pinch point trade; and if he will make a statement. [271401]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The ranks of infantry private and lance corporal were added to the Pinch Point Register on 20 September 2007.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what criteria are applied in determining whether a position in the armed forces is classed as an operational pinch point trade. [271402]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: An operational pinch point occurs in a branch specialisation, sub-specialisation or area of expertise where the shortfall in trained strength (officers or ratings/other ranks) is such that it has a detrimental impact on operational effectiveness. This might be as a result of adherence to single-service harmony guidelines, under-manning, and/or levels of commitment that exceed the resourced manpower ceiling for the trades or areas of expertise involved.
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the (a) trained requirement, (b) trained strength and (c) numbers fit for duty of each pinch point trade in the armed forces is. [257675]
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: As I stated in my reply on 20 October 2008, Official Report, columns 122-26W, Fit for Task strengths are not routinely recorded and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, the following table shows the liability, strength and shortfalls, in real numbers and percentage figures.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |