|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Willie Rennie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has provided to each Combat Stress centre for providing treatment to war pensioners in each of the last 10 years; and how many pensioners have been treated at each such centre. [Official Report, 26 October 2009, Vol. 498, c. 1MC.]
Mr. Kevan Jones: Funds are provided through the War Pensions Scheme's discretionary power to meet the cost of any necessary expenses in respect of medical, surgical or rehabilitative treatment of ex-members of the armed forces that arise from a disablement due to service before 6 April 2005 where it is not provided for under other UK legislation. This includes the individual costs of war pensioners undergoing remedial treatment at homes run by Combat Stress for conditions related to their individual pensioned disablement and of related expenses such as travel costs. Combat Stress receives separate funding from the Scottish Executive for war pensioners' resident in Scotland who receive treatment at Hollybush House.
|Funding (£ million)|
Funding figures for the previous two years and a complete breakdown of the number of war pensioners treated at each centre could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, in order to give some indication of the numbers of war pensioners receiving treatment, we can state that in financial year 2007-08 some 1,200 individuals, funded through the auspices of the War Pensions Scheme, were treated at the three Combat Stress sites.
Review notes and the consequent contingent liabilities which include underwriting the costs of the planning process have been approved. These were included within departmental minutes in relation
to the Defence Training Review Package 1 Project which were lodged in the Library of the House on 29 January 2008, 17 February 2009 and 26 June 2009 respectively. In the case of the latter, approval of the underwrite is dependant on the successful outcome of contract negotiations.
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which military (a) bases and (b) other sites owned by his Department containing accommodation areas are (i) redundant and (ii) shortly to become redundant for his Departments purposes. 
In my answer of 3 June 2009 (Official Report, column 551W) I undertook to write to you with details of which military bases and other sites owned by the Department containing accommodation, are redundant or shortly to become redundant for the Departments purposes.
The Department routinely places in the Library of the House a list of its sites being disposed of or coming up for disposal. An updated list will shortly be placed in the Library of the House.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many notifications his Department made to the Information Commissioner in the year ended 30 April 2009 in respect of the loss or mishandling of personal information or data; what was notified in each such case; and how many individuals were the subjects of personal information or data in respect of which such notifications were made. 
Mr. Hutton: Under the mandatory requirements of the Data Handling Report published on 25 June 2008, the Ministry of Defence is required to give a summary report on data breaches reported to the Information Commissioner in our annual resource accounts.
We will be publishing information on personal data security breaches reported to the Information Commissioner for the 2008-09 reporting year before Parliament rises in July. The information is currently being compiled and is to be audited and verified before it is laid before Parliament. The equivalent information from the 2007-08 annual resource account can be found at:
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the original target date for the completion of the first increment of the Defence Information Infrastructure programme was; when the original target date was changed; and on what date the first increment was completed. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: When the contract for the DII programme was approved in March 2005, the target date for completion of Increment 1 was end July 2007. The target date was revised in December 2006, when the contract was amended to include Increment 2, and again in October 2008. The delivery target of 62,800 terminals was completed in mid February 2009 within weeks of the planned milestone set for the end of the first increment.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much the Defence Information Infrastructure programme was estimated to cost at the latest date for which figures are available; and what the original estimated cost of the programme was. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: The original estimate for the DII programme was £5,854 million. This estimate did not include the Deployed and Top Secret requirements as their capability and scope was not fully mature at that time. The current estimated cost of realising DII, including the cost of related programmes, is £7.1 billion. This remains unchanged from the figure reported by the National Audit Office in July 2008.
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Gurkha soldiers who served with the UK armed forces before 1997 receive no pension from his Department; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: There are around 5,000 veterans and veterans' widows who do not qualify for a Service Pension but who receive a Welfare Pension from the Gurkha Welfare Scheme, which is the field arm of the independent charity, the Gurkha Welfare Trust. The Welfare Pension is paid from donations made to the Gurkha Welfare Trust which allows them a sustainable lifestyle. The Ministry of Defence grants the Gurkha Welfare Trust more than £1 million per year, which covers most of its administrative costs in Nepal.
There are around 7,000 veterans who did not serve for long enough to qualify for a Service Pension and who are not yet old enough or needy enough to qualify for a Welfare Pension. On leaving the Brigade of Gurkhas, they would have received a gratuity but no pension. If these veterans fall on hard times they too become eligible for a Welfare Pension.
Mr. Quentin Davies: All in service frontline military aircraft are deemed to be available for operations at various states of readiness, ranging from those that are available immediately to those that may require a period of notice to deploy.
For the total number of frontline in service military aircraft, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 3 June 2009, Official Report, column 4MC, to the hon. Member for Woodspring (Dr. Fox). For the number of aircraft available for training, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 29 June 2009, Official Report, column 46W, to the hon. Member for Woodspring.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of measures to preserve the identities of the battalions which make up the Royal Regiment of Scotland since the merger of the Scottish regiments; 
Bill Rammell: Since the formation of the large, single-cap badge The Royal Regiment of Scotland, the separate identities of its antecedent regiments have been preserved in a number of ways, not least by including them prominently in the battalion titles, for example; The Royal Highland Fusiliers, 2nd Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland, and The Black Watch, 3rd Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland. Preservation is further illustrated by the retention of golden threads in uniforms and accoutrements such as the Black Watch red hackle and the Highlanders' blue hackle.
The identities of the regiment's battalions are very clear and easily understood by its officers and soldiers and the wider community in Scotland. The regiment places great importance in its heritage and uses its history to inspire and nurture its new recruits and current members; the regimental history taught to its soldiers is captured in a handbook which is given to all new recruits. The Army ensures that regimental traditions, heritage, cultures and local connections continue through the excellent relations between its retired soldiers, the serving community, and the outstanding support from the local communities associated with their antecedent regiments.
There are no plans to introduce a single colour of hackle for all Territorial Army (TA) soldiers in The Royal Regiment of Scotland as this would run contrary to the traditions of infantry regiments in Scotland.
However, 52nd Lowland, 6th Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland (6 SCOTS) currently wear either a black or white hackle while 51st Highland, 7th Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland (7 SCOTS) wear a variety of colourseach colour representing one of the former Scottish infantry regiments.
This variety of head dress (within a regiment, battalion, and in some cases a company) is as a result of the reorganisation of the infantry structure. It is very unusual in the British Army and contrary to normal regimental integrity.
Therefore, the regimental headquarters of The Royal Regiment of Scotland is currently considering proposals from each of the two TA battalions to have their own unique and distinctive hackle to establish their own identities, which will then be consistent with the other five Regular Army battalions in The Royal Regiment of Scotland, each of whom wear their own single coloured hackle.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|