Mr Thomas: To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners whether the Church Commissioners own navigation rights over any navigable rivers; and if he will make a statement. 
Sir Stuart Bell: As far as I am aware, the Church Commissioners do not own any special navigation rights. By way of a statement, where they own a river or part thereof, they own the usual rights of access or, where applicable, fishing or mooring rights. However these rights do not override the general right of the public to navigate.
Dr Fox: The Ministry of Defence does not record figures for insurgent or civilian casualties in Afghanistan because of the immense difficulty and risks that would be involved in collecting robust data.
Every effort is made to avoid civilian casualties and we do investigate all claims of civilian fatalities brought to our attention. Any that are the result of action by UK armed forces are always a matter of profound regret.
Mr Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what districts in Helmand Province the UK will have lead responsibility for security after General Mills assumes command of Regional Command (South West). 
Dr Fox [holding answer 14 June 2010]: Alongside our Afghan partners in Combined Forces Helmand, the UK has lead responsibility for security in Lashkar Gah, Nahr-E Saraj and parts of Nad-E Ali district. UK troops reporting to the US Marine Corps Regimental Combat Team 2 working alongside their Afghan partners in Combined Force Sangin also have responsibility for the majority of Kajaki and Sangin districts.
Dr Fox [holding answer 17 June 2010]: The operational allowance is drawn in part from the Government Reserve, and in part from the core Defence budget. This reflects the priority this Government places on repairing the Military Covenant and properly supporting our armed forces in Afghanistan. It also acknowledges that although the MOD budget has been protected in 2010-11, it is vital that all Departments prioritise resources to the front line and assist in the key task of reducing the debt inherited by the new Government.
Dr Francis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many fatalities of Welsh service personnel there have been in Afghanistan since the commencement of military operations in that country. 
Dr Francis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many injuries there have been to Welsh members of the armed forces in Afghanistan since the commencement of military operations in that country; and how many of those members of the armed forces who were injured were transferred to the UK for treatment. 
Dr Fox [holding answer 17 June 2010]: The combined ISAF and Afghan mission in Kandahar province aims to increase the presence of the Afghan Government and increase security in targeted areas to allow the Government to provide essential services for the local population.
The number of Afghan and ISAF forces has increased to provide deeper security and governance in Kandahar City and wider districts. This will be followed by further expansion of ISAF troops later this summer. Our contribution as part of ISAF in that area continues to include the core headquarters staff of Regional Command (South) for which the command will pass, as planned, to the US later this year.
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) with reference to the Prime Minister's announcement of 10 June 2010, what estimate he has made of the number of additional counter-improvised explosive devices teams the additional £67 million will fund; 
(2) with reference to the Prime Minister's announcement of 10 June 2010, how the additional £67 million to be provided to counter-improvised explosive devices (IEDs) will be allocated between expenditure on (a) armoured vehicles and (b) counter-IED teams. 
Dr Fox: The allocation of up to an additional £67 million from the reserve to support the campaign to counter the improvised explosive device (IED) threat in Afghanistan, announced by the Prime Minister on 10 June, will make a considerable contribution to operational capability. For reasons of operational security, I am not able to comment on the number of counter-IED (C-IED) teams in theatre. However, the additional funding announced by the Prime Minister will allow us to equip a significant increase in that number. The additional funds include approximately £40 million for more protected vehicles for use by our C-IED teams; the remainder will be used to enhance other critical capabilities, including more remote control vehicles, and enhancements to our military working dog capability.
Mr Davidson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether any Minister in his Department examined the break clauses on the aircraft carrier contract (a) on their first day in office and (b) subsequently. 
Peter Luff: The Secretary of State announced on his first day in office that the Ministry of Defence would conduct a Strategic Defence and Security Review to review all aspects of defence capability. As part of that ongoing work all equipment programmes are subject to review and re-approval scrutiny.
Bridget Phillipson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding his Department (a) has allocated in the last five years and (b) intends to allocate in the next five years to the King's Centre for Defence Medicine; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan [holding answer 15 June 2010]: The question on the funding of King's Centre for Defence Medicine is presumed to be referring to the work of King's Centre for Military Health Research with whom, in 2003, the MOD commissioned research into the health of military personnel deployed to Iraq. In 2006, the study was extended for a further three years and broadened to include all subsequent Iraq deployments as well as deployments to Afghanistan. This research programme now follows a cohort of over 20,000 serving and former members of the armed forces. Earlier this year the study was extended for a further three years to maintain the database and further explore the data obtained in phases one and two.
|Contract period||Funding (£ million)|
Phases one and two have shown that the health and wellbeing of the UK armed forces is in general good and that there was no overall significant increase in mental ill-health as a result of operational deployment, although effects were seen in both reservists and those in combat roles.
Dr Fox: Under the Armed Forces Pension Scheme (AFPS) pensions are not normally stopped on imprisonment. A pension could be withheld at the point of leaving the armed forces if the individual was going direct to jail for at least 10 years for acts such as treason or breach of the Official Secrets Acts. Post service, it is possible, at the discretion of the Secretary of State, that a pension could be forfeited in very particular circumstances, but the position of dependants would also be considered.
Under the War Pension Scheme (WPS) pensions are normally withheld if the term of imprisonment is more than 12 months or detention in psychiatric facilities as a result of a criminal conviction. The pension is restored upon release and twelve months of basic pension arrears paid. Where hardship can be shown up to half pension can be paid to dependants. Guaranteed income payments made under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) are not stopped during a term of imprisonment.
The Service Personnel and Veterans Agency is responsible for administration of the AFPS, the WPS and the AFCS and details of suspension are held against the individual's records. No AFPS pensions are known to be in suspension. The total number of WPS pensions in suspension is not held in a reportable format and the number could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr Hanson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 14 June 2010, Official Report, columns 248-49W, on departmental private education, how many service personnel of each rank qualified for assistance under the continuity of education allowance in each year; and how much was spent on each educational establishment which provides places funded under the scheme in each year. 
|Financial year 2007-08|
|Army rank or equivalent||Number|
|Financial year 2008-09|
|Army rank or equivalent||Number|
|(1 )Fewer than 5. Notes: 1. Where personnel have been promoted during a financial year, only their most senior rank has been counted. 2. Rounding has been applied to all figures. Totals have been rounded separately and therefore may not equal the sum of their rounded parts.|
|1 April 2010-percentage of armed forces personnel by area of posting|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|