| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
3 Jun 2010 : Column 76W—continued
Trident
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his most recent estimate is of the cost of (a) replacement of the Trident submarine system and (b) the programme for the replacement of the warheads. [147]
Dr Fox [holding answer 2 June 2010]: The 2006 White Paper "The Future of the UK's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994) stated that the total procurement costs of the successor deterrent capability will be in the region of £15 billion to £20 billion, at 2006-07 prices, for a four-boat fleet. This comprises £11 billion to £14 billion for the submarines, £2 billion to £3 billion for the possible refurbishment or replacement of the warhead and £2 billion to £3 billion for infrastructure.
On current plans, we will be in a position to release more up-to-date costs later this year after the final Initial Gate paper has been considered.
Dr Whiteford: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent estimate he has made of (a) the total procurement costs associated with implementing the proposals in the White Paper on The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent, Cm 6994, (b) the cost of four successor submarines, (c) the cost of refurbishing or replacing the Trident warhead, (d) the infrastructure costs associated with these proposals and (e) the cost of replacing the Trident missile system. [711]
Dr Fox: The 2006 White Paper "The Future of the UK's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994) stated that the total procurement costs of the successor deterrent capability will be in the region of £15 billion £20 billion, at 2006-07 prices, for a four-boat fleet. This comprises £11 billion-14 billion for the submarines, £2 billion-3 billion for the possible refurbishment or replacement of the warhead and £2 billion-3 billion for infrastructure.
On current plans, we will be in a position to release more up-to-date costs later this year after the final Initial Gate paper has been considered.
In addition, the 2006 White Paper made clear that the Trident D5 missile is expected to last until the 2040s. At this range, any estimate of the cost of a replacement missile would be highly speculative: the equivalent cost for the Trident D5 missile was some £1.5 billion at 2006-07 prices.
Dr Whiteford: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his most recent estimate is of the annual in-service cost of the nuclear deterrent programme once the successor submarine is in service. [712]
Dr Fox: As the 2006 White Paper 'The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent' (Cm6994) makes clear, once the new fleet of ballistic missile submarines come into service we expect that the in-service costs of the UK's nuclear deterrent, which will include the Atomic Weapons Establishment's costs, will be similar to today, around 5 to 6% of the defence budget.
Dr Whiteford:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent estimate he has made of expenditure
on the UK nuclear deterrent programme, including (a) the atomic weapons establishment and the successor submarine programme, (b) the atomic weapons establishment and (c) the successor submarine programme in each year from 2008-09 to 2019-20. [713]
Dr Fox: The expenditure of the nuclear deterrent programme in the period covered by the 2007 comprehensive spending review is:
| £ million | |||
| Actual expenditure | Predicted expenditure | ||
| Area | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 |
Spending plans for 2011-12 and beyond will be set as part of the Government's spending review process.
Mr Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will consider the merits of alternatives to a like-for-like replacement for Trident. [720]
Dr Fox: The Government are committed to the maintenance of Britain's nuclear deterrent. We will scrutinise the renewal of Trident to ensure value for money.
Mr Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the Initial Gate decision for the successor submarine project is due to be made; what reasons were given by the Defence Board for a postponement of the Initial Gate decision; and whether he plans to provide for approval of the proposal by Parliament before the decision is made. [721]
Peter Luff: We postponed the Initial Gate decision to allow more time to review fully the possible design options.
It is not normal for Parliament to be involved in Initial Gate decisions for procurement projects. I do however, propose to update Parliament on progress after Initial Gate. The main investment decision point, and the point at which we would issue the main contracts to industry for the construction of the new submarines, is still several years away.
Home Department
Durham Constabulary: Cost-effectiveness
Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what savings Durham Constabulary is expected to make as a contribution to the £135 million of police efficiency savings announced on 24 May 2010. [231]
Nick Herbert: Revised Force allocations for 2010-11 were set out in the written ministerial statement laid on 27 May 2010. These are subject to parliamentary approval.
Knives: Crime
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what her policy is on reducing knife crime; and if she will make a statement. [342]
James Brokenshire: To free up officer time to be better able to deal with the crime, including knife crime, that blights lives, we will reduce time-wasting bureaucracy that hampers police operations and introduce better technology to make policing more effective while saving taxpayers' money.
In addition, in the Coalition Government's programme for crime and policing, we have committed to make hospitals share non-confidential information with the police so they know where gun and knife crime is happening and can target stop-and-search in gun and knife crime hot spots.
Police Authorities
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost to the public purse was of Essex Police Authority in the latest year for which information is available; what plans she has to increase the level of cost-effectiveness of police authorities in the 12 months; and if she will make a statement. [186]
Nick Herbert: Essex Police Authority estimate they spent £1.6 million specifically on the administration of the Authority in their Revenue Budget Statement for 2009-10. Including the force budget, the police authority received a total of £260.3 million in that financial year. The Government intend to introduce directly elected individuals to replace police authorities. I also expect police forces to continue to drive out wasteful spending on support functions, reduce bureaucracy and increase efficiency in key functions - leaving the frontline of policing strong and secure.
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans she has for the future of police authorities; and if she will make a statement. [189]
Nick Herbert: The Government are committed to replacing bureaucratic accountability with democratic accountability. We will introduce directly-elected individuals to replace police authorities and hold forces to account on behalf of the public.
Police Committees: Pay
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much funding her Department has allocated for payments to members of police committees in each of the last four years. [1]
Nick Herbert: The information requested is not held centrally. It is a matter for each individual police authority what payment it makes to its members, from the core funding provided by Government.
Police: Bureaucracy
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps she plans to take to reduce the amount of time spent by police officers on administrative tasks; what recent estimate she has made of the average time spent by police officers on administration per (a) day, (b) week and (c) month; what recent representations she has received on police morale; what response she made to such representations; and if she will make a statement. [184]
Nick Herbert: The police should be focusing on police work, not paperwork. We will introduce better technology, return charging decisions to the police for minor offences and look very carefully at the health and safety rules.
I want the service to play its part as well and we will challenge forces to look closely at their internal systems. Police officers must have the professional discretion to make decisions.
I have already discussed these issues at the full Police Federation Conference earlier this month and will continue to explore them with the full range of policing partners.
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps she is taking to reduce the number of forms police officers are required to complete in respect of each prosecution; what recent discussions she has had with the Police Federation on that matter; and if she will make a statement. [187]
Nick Herbert: We will reduce time-wasting bureaucracy that hampers police operations, return to common sense policing and introduce better technology to make policing more effective while saving taxpayers' money. I want to make sure that officers can use their professional discretion without being hindered by excessive bureaucracy and risk assessments. As a priority we will return charging decisions to the police for minor offences so that frontline officers are sufficiently empowered to use their discretion.
I discussed these proposals with the Police Federation at their annual conference earlier this month and will continue to engage with them and other police partners on this issue.
Police: Pay
Andrew Percy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much was spent on police overtime in each police force in the last 12 months. [260]
Nick Herbert: The latest available information is for 2008-09 and is set out in the table.
Information about the categories of police service expenditure, including overtime, is available on the website of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance Accountants
| Police force overtime (England and Wales) 2008-09 | ||
| £ | ||
| Police force | Officer overtime | Overtime by other staff |
| (1) Information not available for Thames Valley police | ||
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |