|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Anas Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development (1) what grants have been awarded by his Department in 2010-11 to date; what grants he plans to award in each of the next two years; what the monetary value is of each such grant; and to which organisations such grants are made; 
Mr Andrew Mitchell:
In accordance with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD's) Development Assistance Committee (DAC), the
Department for International Development (DFID) defines grants as "transfers in cash or in kind for which no legal debt is incurred by the recipient". This would account for the entirety of DFID's budget not allocated to loans and promissory notes.
Detailed information on awards in relation to these grants is not available without incurring disproportionate cost. However, we can provide details on resource spend for 2009-10 of £5,281 million and forecast resource spend for 2010-11 of £5,817 million. Both these figures exclude loans and promissory notes and include administration costs, in accordance with OECD DAC guidelines. Forecast resource spend for 2011-12 is not yet available.
Mr Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the One UN approach to UN agencies work in developing countries; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Andrew Mitchell: A number of evaluations of the One UN pilots have been carried out by country governments and the UN. These demonstrate that some progress has been made, such as aligning the UN closer to national frameworks and priorities. However, Delivering as One needs to go further to improve the effectiveness of the work of UN agencies in developing countries. The Multilateral Aid Review will assess how effective UN agencies are in working together, this will report in early 2011. An independent evaluation of Delivering as One is due for completion in 2011.
Stella Creasy: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent discussions he has had with the Government of Sri Lanka on his Department's capacity to (a) provide and (b) fund programmes to rehabilitate internally-displaced persons and refugees in that country. 
Mr Duncan: Ministers have had no recent discussions. The British High Commission in Colombo is in close contact with the Government of Sri Lanka. Officials from the Department for International Development (DFID) recently visited the country to assess the situation and review the impact of our remaining humanitarian projects, which target internally displaced persons (IDPs).
The IDP situation in Sri Lanka has significantly improved with more than 270,000 displaced people released or returned to their homes and approximately 22,000 people remaining in camps. The UK's £13.5 million emergency humanitarian programme, which began in 2008, has provided water and sanitation, healthcare, shelter, cash grants and livelihoods recovery for displaced and returning families. This funding will be completed at the end of the current financial year after which we will continue funding for demining, to help enable those persons still displaced to return home. DFID has not provided aid, other than humanitarian assistance, to Sri Lanka since 2006, when the country graduated to middle income status.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development whether he has had recent discussions with the Government of Sri Lanka on land
and property restitution programmes for the purposes of resettlement and assisting those displaced during the civil war in that country. 
Mr Duncan: Ministers have had no recent discussions. The British High Commissioner in Colombo and other UK Government officials are in regular contact with the Government of Sri Lanka on a range of issues, including land rights. This subject has been raised on a number of occasions recently.
Mr Andrew Mitchell: The Multilateral Aid Review being carried out by my Department is assessing the effectiveness and value for money provided by multilateral organisations we fund in delivering UK development objectives. The World Bank is one of the organisations being assessed. The review will identify areas where the performance of each multilateral needs to improve, and that will provide a basis for us to discuss with them the reforms required. I will be publishing the results of the Multilateral Aid Review, including an assessment of the World Bank, and the implications for our funding and future engagement in February 2011.
Anas Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much funding her Department has allocated in grants for (a) 2009-10 and (b) 2010-11; and how much such funding she plans to allocate for 2011-12. 
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many civilian medical staff in each speciality have been employed by Defence Medical Services to provide support to Operation Herrick in each of the last five years; and what the cost to the public purse was of each type of support in each such year. 
|Support to Operation Herrick-UK-based civilian medical personnel|
|Specialism||Total cost (£)|
|Support to Operation Herrick-Theatre-based civilian medical personnel|
|NHS seconded nurses||Total cost (£)|
In addition, Army primary health care services costs attributed to the support of Operation Herrick for funding locums such as GPs, nurses, physiotherapists and health care assistants to backfill gaps in medical facilities arising from individuals deploying on Operation Herrick are as follows:
financial year 2008-09: £1.6 million;
financial year 2009-10: £2.2 million; and
financial year 2010-11: £2.4 million.
financial year 2009-10: £0.925 million; and
financial year 2010-11 to date: £0.596 million.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether his Department has a contract for the protection of supply convoys in Afghanistan with (a) Watan Risk Management and (b) Kandahar Security Force; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) whether his Department has a contract for the protection of supply convoys in Afghanistan with (a) Commander Ruhullah, (b) Colonel Abdul Razziq, (c) Pacha Khan Zadran, (d) Abdul Wali Khan and (e) Commander Matiullah Kahn; and if he will make a statement; 
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many incidents of attacks on supply convoys supplying UK forces in Afghanistan were recorded in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement. 
Nick Harvey: Supplies are delivered to UK Forces in Afghanistan through a number of means, including military convoys, and contractor logistic convoys, contracted both by the UK and NATO. As a result we do not hold centrally complete statistics relating to the number of incidents of attacks on convoys supplying UK forces.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department has used the host nation trucking contract to supply UK forces serving in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement. 
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department employs private security contractors to provide highway security for supply convoys in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement. 
Nick Harvey [holding answer 29 November 2010]: As at 1 October 2010, 95,160 past and present members of the UK armed forces have been identified as having deployed to Afghanistan. This figure only includes those people working within the geographical boundaries of Afghanistan. It does not include personnel who deployed to Afghanistan between the periods 1 January 2003 and 14 October 2005 for which data are not available.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence who in his Department is responsible for the operational management of contracts with trucking companies to supply UK forces serving in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement. 
Nick Harvey: Joint Force Support, the UK's logistic Brigade in Afghanistan, is responsible for the in-theatre management of contracts, as well as ordering from those managed by NATO. Defence Equipment and Support manage contracts to move supplies to theatre and Defence Food Services manage a food supply contract.
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions Royal Air Force fighters were scrambled from (a) RAF Leuchars and (b) RAF Coningsby to intercept aircraft in each of the last five years. 
|Number of days QRA launched|
|(1) Records held from September 2006. (2) To date.|
QRA aircraft are held at ground readiness at RAF Coningsby and RAF Leuchars. I am withholding the information as to which base QRA aircraft were launched from for each incident as its disclosure would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate his Department has made of the effect on his Department's costs of the decision to change the in-service date of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. 
Peter Luff: The strategic defence and security review determined that we will build two Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers but only use one routinely, holding the other at extended readiness. We will convert the operational carrier with catapults and arrestor gear to allow us to procure the more capable carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter.
The Ministry of Defence made initial estimates of the cost impact of measures for the purposes of formulating policy. We now need time to investigate and assess the best means of delivery. Until this work is completed, the MOD is not prepared to release any cost estimates.
Mr Robathan: The Ministry of Defence provide service personnel and their dependants with a wide range of allowances ranging from accommodation allowances to separation and compensatory allowances. A comprehensive list of these allowances and their eligibility criteria is given in the Joint Service Publication 752, Tri-Service Regulations for Allowances, which is available in the Library of the House.
Former members of the armed forces do not receive allowances from the Ministry of Defence although certain provisions may be made available to them, such as the provision of a dedicated free helpline and access to a free medical assessment programme. Some one-off grants are available in some instances, such as the funding for the War Widow(er)s Pilgrimage Scheme.
In our programme for government, we described a number of measures which are designed to rebuild the covenant. We have already announced the doubling of operational allowance, changes to rest and recuperation leave and a "Troops to Teachers" programme.
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the current shortfall is in respect of medical personnel of each rank available for active service; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: A breakdown of Defence Medical Services (DMS) regular medical personnel manning levels are provided in the following table. While shortfalls exist in some specialties the DMS have met all the operational requirements placed on them. Medical support to deployed operations is absolutely vital and there is no question of British forces deploying on military operations without the appropriate medical support.
Where a particular specialty is in short supply within the Defence Medical Services to support deployed operations, a flexible manning approach is used drawing upon regular personnel, reserves and allied forces and on occasions a limited number of civilian contractors are deployed to support operations and to backfill positions in the United Kingdom to allow uniformed personnel to deploy.
The total number of personnel required by the DMS is neither calculated nor held by rank; therefore shortfall is shown by specialty, with the trained strength (as at 1 April 2010) split into 'officer ranks' and 'other ranks'.
Actions are being taken to ensure that the DMS recruit and train sufficient staff particularly against specialities where there are shortfalls; however, the long duration of medical training means it will take some years before current shortages are fully addressed.
|Defence medical personnel levels as at 1 April 2010|
|Trained s trength|
|Job/specialty||Requirement||Officer Rank||Other Ranks||Total||Shortfall|
Operational tour lengths for Defence Medical Service personnel routinely vary between eight weeks and six months depending on their service and their particular speciality: rank of personnel is not a contributory factor in length of deployment.
Consultants deploy for an average of eight weeks, nurses and hospital based personnel deploy for three to six months, while headquarters and support personnel would deploy for six months. Additionally, Royal Navy personnel are considered operational when serving at sea which can last up to two years, although they may not be away from the UK for the whole of this period.
While there is not a fixed period of deployment for defence medical personnel, the Army, Royal Navy and RAF set individual guidelines for the maximum time service personnel should spend away and the minimum time that they should have between operational deployments, known as 'Harmony Guidelines'. This information is continuously monitored by the single services.
|Percentage under 18|
|As at 1 April each year||Percentage|
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the strategic defence and security review, page 24, what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department of introducing the Future Rapid Effects System Utility Vehicle. 
Peter Luff: The Ministry of Defence does not publish the costs of programmes or in-service dates until after their main investment decision point. To do otherwise could potentially undermine our commercial position.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the strategic defence and security review, page 24, what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department of introducing a new range of medium weight armoured vehicles, including Terrier engineer vehicles and the Scout reconnaissance vehicles. 
Peter Luff: The Ministry of Defence currently has three medium weight armoured vehicle procurement programmes under way: the Terrier engineer vehicle, the Utility Vehicle (UV), and the Specialist Vehicle (SV), of which the Scout reconnaissance vehicle is a variant.
The total estimated cost or in-service dates of the UV and SV programmes cannot be confirmed until their respective Main Investment Decisions are made. The Terrier engineer vehicle programme has passed Main Investment Decision and is currently in the Demonstration and Manufacture Phase. The programme will cost approximately £386 million.
Mr Reid: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what published information he has made available to local organisations and individuals about his estimates of the (a) trend in the number of service personnel based at HM Naval Base Clyde and (b) the projected number of (i) single living accommodation bed spaces and (ii) service family accommodation properties to be built between now and 2021. 
Mr Robathan [holding answer 25 November 2010]: On 6 May 2009, Official Report, column 17WS, as part of an announcement regarding the Maritime Change Programme, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) confirmed that HM Naval Base Clyde will become the main operating base for all classes of submarines, including the future classes of submarines, such as the replacement for the Vanguard Class. Since then, the MOD has and continues to work closely with the local authorities in the Clyde area to assess the potential impact of this decision. This has included releasing preliminary information, which includes initial estimates of the potential numbers of personnel likely to move to the naval base and their potential accommodation requirements. The information released was for future planning purposes only and does not reflect what might be the final position.
In view of his interest in this matter, I will write to the right hon. Member to provide him with a copy of the data released to Clyde local authorities along with an explanation of how these forecasts have been calculated.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what issues relating to (a) lengths and (b) intervals of tours of duty are being considered as part of the Defence Reform Unit's review. 
Dr Fox: As set out in the strategic defence and security review White Paper I have initiated a review of force generation including tour lengths and harmony guidelines. The review will consider a wide range of factors including the impact on the morale and long-term sustainability of the armed forces and the implications of tour length on operational effectiveness, derived from continuity and sustainability. The Defence Reform Unit alongside the single Service Chiefs will ensure that we are being as efficient and effective as possible. I have asked that the review reports to me by July 2011.
Anas Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what grants have been awarded by his Department in 2010-11 to date; what grants he plans to award in each of the next two years; what the monetary value is of each such grant; and to which organisations such grants are made. 
Mr Robathan [holding answer 18 November 2010]: The departmental figures for FY 2010-11 are the forecast payments to be made this financial year. The funding allocation for the forward years has still to be agreed.
|Name of grant/grant in aid||FY 2010-11 (£ million)|
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what capabilities to counter (a) explosive ordnance and (b) improvised explosive devices will receive increased funding from his Department in each year of the Comprehensive Spending Review period. 
Peter Luff: During the spending review period the Ministry of Defence will continue to invest in a wide range of capabilities to counter explosive ordnance and improvised explosive devices. Specific enhancements in this area will be agreed as part of the annual departmental financial planning round, which has yet to be completed. Urgent operational requirements will be addressed in the normal manner as they materialise.
Thomas Docherty: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he plans to disclose the top secret documents relating to UK atomic tests in compliance with the order from the War Pensions Tribunal; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: There have been an unusually high number of complex requests for classified information and documents in the current group of war pensions appeals' cases. The Ministry of Defence continues to work closely with the War Pensions Tribunal to find proportionate and cost-effective ways of ensuring that all relevant documents are disclosed and to meet the various timescales set out in the judge's latest set of directions. Special security arrangements have been agreed with the tribunal to ensure appropriate handling of any highly classified documents.
David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what analysis his Department undertook of the capability of the armed forces in respect of defending the Falkland Islands from attack prior to the recent agreement with the government of France. 
Nick Harvey: The Government remain unequivocally committed to the defence of the Falkland Islands. There have been no material changes made to the forces at the disposal of Commander British Forces South Atlantic Islands, which include Typhoon aircraft on Quick Reaction Alert, C-130 and VC-10 aircraft, a dedicated Falkland Islands Patrol Vessel, the Roulement Infantry Company, the Falkland Islands Ground Defence Force, helicopter assets (including search and rescue), the Resident Rapier Battery, and various fixed installations on the islands. There is also no change to the continuous Royal Naval presence in the region.
Additionally, I refer the hon. Member to comments made by the Secretary of State for Defence, the right hon. Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) during debates in the House on 2 November 2010, Official Report, column 787, and 4 November 2010, Official Report, columns 1071-72.
Tessa Munt: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the proposed UK-France treaty on nuclear weapons co-operation, whether military flights between the UK and France will involve the transportation of nuclear materials. 
Dr Fox: Some small amounts of nuclear materials will be transferred by military flights between the UK and France but there will be no transfer of ownership between the two states. Any necessary movements of nuclear materials between the UK and France in support of hydrodynamics experimentation will be conducted under the appropriate safety and regulatory regimes and will be consistent with our international treaty obligations.
Peter Luff: Following the grounding incident, which occurred off the Isle of Skye on 22 October, HMS Astute returned to Her Majesty's Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde at Faslane under her own power and was docked in the shiplift to enable detailed damage assessments and then repairs to be undertaken.
The comprehensive range of assessments revealed that during the grounding incident, HMS Astute's lower rudder skeg was damaged. As a result of the subsequent
towing incident, which occurred as HMS Astute was being towed in to deeper waters, the starboard forward hydroplane, a casing plate and a small number of surrounding anechoic tiles, as well as the rip-tow, which is a fitted towline attached to the submarine, were also damaged.
I can confirm that the repairs required as a result of these two incidents have now been completed and, on 24 November, HMS Astute exited the shiplift facility. Consistent with normal practices, HMS Astute was assisted by tug from the shiplift to a submarine berth within the naval base.
HMS Astute is now preparing to continue her extensive, First of Class, programme of training and sea trials. For security reasons I am unable to confirm when HMS Astute will sail from HMNB Clyde; however, the Department anticipates that this will be in December. Following completion of the training and sea trials programme, current plans indicate that HMS Astute will be ready for operational handover in 2012.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance capabilities will receive increased funding from his Department in each year of the comprehensive spending review period. 
Peter Luff: During the spending review period the Ministry of Defence will continue to invest in a wide range of intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance capabilities. Specific enhancements in this area will be agreed as part of the departmental financial planning round process, which has yet to be completed.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of fulfilling the UK's obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation in respect of civilian search and rescue using (a) the Nimrod MRA4 and (b) alternative arrangements; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) pursuant to the answer of 28 October 2010, Official Report, columns 450-1W, on Nimrod aircraft, what estimate he has made of the future support costs of (a) aircrew, (b) training, (c) fuel, (d) spares and (e) ground crew in relation to (i) 21, (ii) 19 and (iii) nine Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) what his most recent estimate is of the total lifecycle cost over 10 years in real terms of the Nimrod MRA4 in (a) 1996 and (b) 2010 over a 25 year life cycle; and if he will make a statement; 
(4) if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of providing search and rescue cover for (a) Typhoons and (b) F-35 JSFs refuelling over the ocean from the Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft using (i) the Nimrod MRA4 and (ii) alternative forms of cover; and if he will make a statement; 
(5) if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of providing airborne intelligence, surveillance, target
acquisition and reconnaissance support for counter-terrorism purposes in UK waters using (a) the Nimrod MRA4 and (b) alternative methods; and if he will make a statement; 
(6) what instructions he has given in relation to future (a) sale, (b) mothballing and (c) decommissioning of the Nimrod MRA4 fleet; what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of each option; and if he will make a statement; 
Peter Luff: The Ministry of Defence has considered a range of options and concluded that the most cost effective is for the nine aircraft to be disposed of following recovery of equipment and systems that can be used elsewhere. Discussions are continuing with BAE Systems on the detail of the disposal.
The MOD made estimates of cost savings accrued from measures considered in the Strategic Defence and Security Review for the purposes of formulating policy. Some of these have been published to help inform the public debate. In the case of the Nimrod MRA4 we estimate that around £2 billion will be saved over the next 10 years, by not bringing the aircraft into service. Release of further detail may prejudice the MOD's negotiating position with its commercial suppliers. The MOD is therefore not prepared to release more detailed savings or updated estimated in-service cost figures at this time.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the capabilities are of the (a) dipping sonar of the Merlin helicopter and (b) deployable Sonobuoys of the Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement. 
Peter Luff: Merlin helicopters can deploy the same sonobuoy types as planned to be used by the Nimrod MRA4, while simultaneously using its dipping sonar. I am withholding further information as its release could prejudice the security, capability and effectiveness of the armed forces.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the (a) speed of reaction, (b) radius of action and (c) endurance is of (i) the Merlin helicopter and (ii) Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement. 
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assessment he has made of the likely effect on lift requirements of operation Herrick of the use of C-130J's as a replacement for the Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement; 
Peter Luff: The C-130 Hercules is not a replacement aircraft for the Nimrod MRA4. There will be no effect on the lift requirements of Operation Herrick. The withdrawal of the C-130K in December 2012 will not affect the situation as its tasks will transfer to the C-130J as part of the drawdown plan.
The in-service fleet consists of 14 Hercules C-130K and 24 Hercules C-130J. The aircraft operate from RAF Lyneham. Aircraft support UK contingency operations and are deployed around the world on operations or exercises, but largely in support of Op Herrick.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assessment he has made of (a) possible uses for and (b) the cost to the public purse of the use of Nimrod MRA4 aircraft in an overland intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance role in support of land forces in Afghanistan in each of the next three years; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what assessment he has made of the consequences of ceasing Nimrod MRA4 aircraft support for the overland intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance role in support of land forces in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement. 
Peter Luff: The Nimrod MRA4 maritime patrol aircraft has been assessed as unsuited to overland operations in Afghanistan. Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance capabilities are being delivered by a range of assets in Afghanistan, and they are kept under constant review to ensure that they continue to meet our mission objectives.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assessment he has made of the earliest possible date for a remotely-piloted aircraft to be introduced as a replacement for the Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what assessment he has made of the cost to his Department of the use of remotely-piloted aircraft as a replacement for the Nimrod MRA4 for (a) intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, (b) maritime protection and (c) search and rescue; and if he will make a statement. 
Peter Luff: Our requirements for Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR) maritime patrol and search and rescue capabilities were assessed during the strategic defence and security review and these are kept under regular review. Any future change to our requirements will be considered as part of the Department's capability planning process.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what discussions he has had with the French Government on the use of Breguet Atlantiques as a substitute for the Nimrod MRA4 (a) intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, (b) maritime protection and (c) search and rescue; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what estimate he has made of the cost of the introduction of the French Breguet Atlantiques as a substitute for the Nimrod MRA4 for (a) intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, (b) maritime protection and (c) search and rescue; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) what discussions he has had with the US Administration on the use of P3 Orions as a substitute for the Nimrod MRA4 for (a) intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, (b) maritime protection and (c) search and rescue; and if he will make a statement; 
(4) whether any (a) maritime patrol, (b) search and rescue and (c) intelligence gathering capability will be lost as a result of the use of P3 Orions as a substitute for the Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement; 
(5) whether any (a) maritime patrol, (b) search and rescue and (c) intelligence gathering capability will be lost as a result of the use of French Breguet Atlantiques as a substitute for the Nimrod MRA4; and if he will make a statement; 
(6) what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department of the introduction of the American P3 Orions as a substitute for the Nimrod MRA4 for (a) intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance, (b) maritime protection and (c) search and rescue; and if he will make a statement. 
Peter Luff: The Ministry of Defence has regular discussions with the Defence Departments of the United States and France on a variety of issues. We currently have no plans to replace the Nimrod MRA4 with either the P3 Orion, or the Breguet Atlantique.
A range of military assets is used to mitigate the capability gap which emerged as a result of the withdrawal from service of Nimrod MR2 in March 2010. Following the decision not to bring the MRA4 into service, we will continue taking these measures forward. Further requirements which might emerge as a result of any change to the threat will be considered as part of the Department's capability planning process.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the strategic defence and security review, what estimate he has made of the savings that will accrue to his Department through efficiencies in military training in each year of the comprehensive spending review period. 
The Ministry of Defence made estimates of the cost savings accrued from measures in the strategic defence and security review for the purposes of formulating policy. Some of these have been published to help inform the public debate. Release of further detail may prejudice the MOD's negotiating position with its commercial suppliers. Furthermore, final savings figures will depend on detailed implementation, which will generally be subject to full consultation with all relevant parties, including the trade unions and the devolved Administrations, as well as the results of mandatory
assessments on the impact that the measures will have on sustainability, equality and diversity and health and safety. The MOD is therefore not prepared to release more detailed figures at this time.
One specific area of work that we will be focussing on is the Defence Technical Training Change Programme (DTTCP) which, following the termination of the Defence Training Rationalisation (DTR) project on 19 October 2010, is a new programme that has been established to build upon the work already started under DTR. DTTCP aims to deliver efficiencies through estate rationalisation and improvements in the delivery of tri-service technical training.
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 11 November 2010, Official Report, column 449W, on Trident value for money review, what external assistance and technical consultancy his Department commissioned for the Trident value for money review; and how much it spent on each piece of work commissioned. 
Dr Fox: £70,000 was spent on assessing the scope for improving efficiency within the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) and a further £120,000 was spent reviewing site infrastructure and processes across the AWE estate. In addition, £10,000 was spent modelling cost and risk on the successor deterrent submarine.
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 to £20 billion, at 2006-07 prices. Once the initial gate investment decision for the replacement submarine has been taken, I will be in a position to release more up-to-date costs.
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what (a) statutory instruments, (b) departmental circulars and (c) other documents his Department has published consequent on the provisions of the Abortion Act 1967 since May 2009; and if he will make a statement. 
Anne Milton: The provisions of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Registration of Regulated Activities) Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/660) required all independent sector providers who carry out regulated activities (such as abortion), to register with the Care Quality Commission from 1 October 2010. Failure to register constitutes an offence under the Act. The authoritative text of statutory instruments is published on the website of the Office for the Public Sector.
Owen Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children under the age of 18 years have died as a result of receiving contaminated blood products while undergoing treatment in the NHS. 
There have been no confirmed reports of any children under the age of 18 who have died as a result of receiving contaminated blood components while undergoing treatment in the national health service since 8 November 2005, when it became a statutory requirement for all United Kingdom blood establishments and hospital blood banks to report serious adverse blood reactions and serious adverse blood events to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). This applies to whole blood, red cell concentrates, platelets, fresh frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate, granulocytes and buffy coat preparations.
Alun Michael: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in (a) Wales, (b) Scotland, Northern Ireland and (d) each region of England have been affected by the provision of contaminated blood or blood products in NHS facilities. 
Anne Milton: Between 8 November 2005 and 26 November 2010 the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) received a total of 35 verified reports. One of these reports came from Wales, two from Scotland, none from Northern Ireland, and 32 from England. Of the 32 verified reports from England, one came from London, eight from the north-west, seven from south-central, four from the south-west, three from the west midlands and nine from Yorkshire and the Humber. 34 of these reports related to bacterial contamination and one related to a possible viral contamination with Hepatitis B.
Anne Milton: The ex gratia schemes that are currently in place are not compensation but provide financial relief for those affected by contaminated blood. I refer the hon. Member to my statement of 14 October 2010, Official Report, column 30WS.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether collaboration takes place between his Department and the Department of Energy and
Climate Change and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to assess risks posed to public health by climate change-related bloodborne pathogens. 
The Department of Health and the Health Protection Agency jointly published, "Health Effects of Climate Change in the UK 2008" which focused on the quantitative aspects of possible impacts of climate change on health. A copy has already been placed in the Library.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is currently taking forward a national Climate Change Risk Assessment as required by the Climate Change Act 2008. The project is assessing the key risks and opportunities to the United Kingdom from climate change. Risks from new and emerging pathogens are being considered as part of this assessment. Additionally, the Department's National Expert Panel on New and Emerging Infections keeps the risks to public health from such threats under constant review.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to (a) assess and (b) mitigate the risks to public health posed by (i) the Asian tiger mosquito and (ii) other bloodborne disease vectors. 
Anne Milton: As the Asian tiger mosquito ( Aedes albopictus) is not present in the United Kingdom, and our climate does not support its lifecycle, there are no steps necessary to mitigate the risks to public health from this mosquito.
The risks to public health posed by the vectors of other blood-borne diseases have been assessed. Surveillance for mosquito and tick disease vectors was undertaken, and West Nile Virus was identified as a key public health risk to the UK. A plan has therefore been developed for the introduction of West Nile Virus to the UK, although the risk of this occurring is considered low. The Health Protection Agency currently runs mosquito and tick surveillance schemes to monitor the situation.
Representations on technologies to reduce health care associated infections are submitted to the Rapid Review Panel (RRP) for consideration. The RRP deals with up to 100 submissions each year and their recommendations are published on the Health Protection Agency website at:
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether his Department plans to increase the range of pathogen reduction technologies used for the treatment of blood products in NHS facilities; and if he will make a statement. 
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress has been made on transposing the EU Blood Directive 2002/98/EC into domestic regulations and guidelines; and if he will make a statement. 
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Health If he will take steps to ensure that Plymouth Derriford Hospital Trust may receive income from making its CyberKnife technology available for the treatment of cancer patients. 
Reimbursement for radiotherapy services falls outside the scope of the mandatory national tariff. The income that trusts receive for radiotherapy services, and the devices that are used in the delivery of these services, is subject to local negotiation between providers and commissioners.
Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust will wish to ensure that when negotiating prices with its commissioners for radiotherapy services, the costs associated with the use of devices such as CyberKnife are taken into consideration.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients were seen by NHS dentists in (a) England, (b) the North West, (c) Cumbria and (d) Westmorland and Lonsdale constituency in each of the last 10 years. 
The number of people registered with a national health service dentist in England, as at 31 March, 1997 to 2006 is available in Annex A of the "NHS Dental Activity and Workforce Report, England: 31 March 2006". Information is provided by primary care trust (PCT) and by strategic health authority (SHA). Annex C provides this information by parliamentary constituency.
This information is based on the old contractual arrangements which were in place up to and including 31 March 2006. This report, published on 23 August 2006, has already been placed in the Library and is also available on the NHS Information Centre website at:
Under the new dental contractual arrangements, introduced on 1 April 2006, patients do not have to be registered with an NHS dentist to receive NHS care. The closest equivalent measure to 'registration' is the number of patients receiving NHS dental services ('patients seen') over a 24-month period. However, this is not directly comparable to the registration data for earlier years.
Information on the number of patients seen in the previous 24-months, in England, is available in Table D1 of Annex 3 of the "NHS Dental Statistics for England: 2010/11, First quarterly report". Information is available at quarterly intervals, from 31 March 2006 to 30 September 2010 and is provided by PCT and SHA, but is not available by parliamentary constituency.
Sir Paul Beresford: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many and what proportion of questions tabled to the Secretary of State for written answer on a named day were answered substantively before or on the day named for answer (a) in Session 2009-10 and (b) since May 2010; how many such questions tabled between May 2010 and 12 November 2010 had not received a substantive answer by 18 November 2010; and what estimate he has made of the average cost to his Department of answering a question for written answer on a named day on the day named for answer in the latest period for which figures are available; 
(2) how many and what proportion of questions tabled to the Secretary of State for ordinary written answer (a) in Session 2009-10 and (b) since May 2010 were answered within (i) seven days and (ii) 14 days of tabling; how many such questions tabled between May 2010 and 12 November 2010 remained unanswered by 18 November 2010; and what estimate he has made of the average cost to his Department of answering a question for ordinary written answer within seven days of tabling in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Simon Burns: The Government have committed to providing the Procedure Committee with sessional statistics in a standard format on the time taken to respond to written parliamentary questions for the 2009-10 Session. This information will be submitted to the Procedure Committee shortly.
|Questions for answer on a named day|
|Questions for ordinary written answer|
|(1) The Government aim to reply to parliamentary questions within a working week and for consistency we measure performance against five sitting days.|
The Treasury conducts an annual indexation exercise of the cost of written and oral parliamentary questions so as to ensure that these average costs are increased in line with increases in underlying costs. The estimated costs for each written question from 20 January 2010 is £154.
Charlotte Leslie: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the support and information on carbohydrate counting given to children with Type 1 diabetes; and if he will make a statement. 
Paul Burstow: The Department has not made a formal assessment of the support and information available on carbohydrate counting provided to children with Type 1 diabetes. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has produced clinical guidelines on the management of Type 1 diabetes, which addresses education on insulin, dietary management and counting carbohydrate intake as an essential part of the care package.
Paediatric diabetes specialist teams play a vital role in good diabetes care, providing support and education including information on carbohydrate counting. The recently published NHS Diabetes care pathway on the management of Type 1 diabetes in childhood and adolescence stresses the importance of carbohydrate counting.
Tristram Hunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will write to primary care trusts setting out the baseline funding allocation for disabled children's frontline services for the next three years. 
Mr Simon Burns: Primary care trust (PCT) revenue allocations are not broken down by policy or service area. Once allocated, it is for PCTs to commission the services they require to meet the healthcare needs of their local populations, taking account of both local and national priorities.
From 2013-14 onwards, the NHS Commissioning Board will be responsible for the fair and efficient use of resources in the national health service. The detail of how resources are allocated to general practitioner (GP) consortia will be a matter for the Commissioning Board. Shadow allocations to GP consortia will be published in late 2011 for 2012-13, and actual allocations for 2013-14 in late 2012.
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he has made an assessment of the effectiveness of coercive treatment for drug addiction in comparison to the effectiveness of voluntary treatment. 
Anne Milton: The Home Office-commissioned Drug Treatment Outcome Research Study (DTORS, 2009) found that criminal justice referrals resulted in equivalent levels of change to non-criminal justice referrals across nearly all outcomes.
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether GP consortia will be expected to engage directly with representatives of those local allied health professional bodies which have a formal relationship with strategic health authorities. 
Effective general practitioner-led commissioning will require the full range of clinical and professional input alongside that of local people. Nurses, allied health professionals and others will all have a vital role to play, with a real opportunity to develop services and improve the health outcomes of their local populations.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much additional funding he plans to allocate to the provision of health care to service personnel as part of the comprehensive spending review settlement for his Department in (a) 2010-11, (b) 2011-12, (c) 2012-13, (d) 2013-14 and (e) 2014-15. 
Mr Simon Burns: In 2010-11, primary care trusts (PCTs) received an increase in revenue funding of £4.4 billion (5.5%). The funding formula upon which the allocations are based takes account of the location of armed forces bases. However, PCT allocations are not broken down by service or policy area, rather it is for PCTs to commission primary and secondary health services to meet national and local priorities. This funding provides standard secondary care services to service personnel; however, their primary care services and non-standard secondary care services are funded by the Ministry of Defence through Defence Medical Services.
In October, the Government announced that health funding will grow by £10.6 billion during this spending review for the years 2011-12 to 2014-15. All patients, including serving personnel, will benefit from the increased funding for health set out in the spending review and from the White Paper reforms. PCT allocations post 2010-11 will be announced in December.
As part of its capital settlement, the Department will also contribute over the spending review period to the capital costs of two health initiatives led by the Ministry of Defence to support health care for the armed forces by providing a medical training establishment and new mental health facilities.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what plans he has to assess the cost-benefit analysis of the cluster formed by the Mid Essex, North East Essex and West Essex primary care trusts; 
(2) how many positions will be abolished in (a) the Mid Essex Primary Care Trust, (b) the North East Essex Primary Care Trust and (c) the West Essex Primary Care Trust as a result of those trusts forming a cluster; and what estimate he has made of the cost of staff leaving those trusts as a result of the merger; 
Under current legislation each PCT must have its own board and is legally responsible for carrying out its functions. However, it has a wide measure of discretion about its management arrangements. In particular it can employ such officers as it considers appropriate and can enter into arrangements to carry out its functions jointly with another PCT or arrange for another PCT to carry out its functions on its behalf.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) non-medical staff, (b) administrators, (c) managers and (d) senior managers there will be in (i) the Mid Essex Primary Care Trust, (ii) the North East Essex Primary Care Trust and (iii) the West Essex Primary Care Trust in each of the next three years. 
The precise numbers of non-medical staff, administrators, managers and senior managers required over the next three years will not be known until the new organisations that will underpin the new system have been designed in more detail.
The Government have fulfilled their commitment to give the national health service a real terms increase in funding each year. The demands on the service are rising and to meet these, the NHS must make up to £20 billion of efficiency savings by 2014, by reducing bureaucracy and doing things differently. Every penny saved will be reinvested to support the delivery of quality health care.
Mike Weatherley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of the provision of herbal medicines in NHS facilities in (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012, (d) 2013 and (e) 2014. 
It is for local health professionals and health care organisations to consider whether to provide and fund complementary and alternative therapies including herbal medicines. In taking such decisions they will wish to take account of issues including safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness and the availability of suitably qualified/regulated practitioners.
Mr Marcus Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of the total running costs for the University hospital, Coventry was paid to the private finance initiative provider in each year from 2006 to 2009; and what percentage of the total is projected to be paid to that provider in (a) 2010 and (b) 2011. 
Mr Simon Burns: The information is not available in the format requested. However, data for the proportion of total revenue expenditure by University hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust in respect of its private finance initiative (PFI) scheme, is set out in the table.
|University hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust-proportion of total revenue expenditure relating to PFI|
|Percentage of total revenue expenditure relating to PFI|
|(1) 2009-10 accounts were compiled under International Finance Reporting Standards under which PFI costs in the audited summarisation schedules of Trusts are split between capital repayments and revenue expenditure elements, which does not make a precise like for like comparison with earlier years in this table possible. However, an estimate of the PFI unitary payment for 2009-10 is held centrally by the Department as well as the audited outturn revenue expenditure figure for the Trust for this year and the percentage figure for this year is calculated using these two figures.|
1. The source of the data is the audited summarisation schedules of the Trust for 2005-06 to 2009-10.
2. The percentages provided represent the net revenue expenditure in respect of PFI schemes as a proportion of total revenue expenditure.
3. 2005-06 to 2008-09 figures compiled under UK Generally Accepted Accounting Practice.
A letter from the Director of Immunisation was sent to the national health service on 19 November 2010 to highlight the importance of achieving high uptake of seasonal influenza vaccine in eligible groups. This letter is available at the following link:
Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 9 September 2010, Official Report, column 664W, on mental health services, whether he plans to commission a study into the level of confidence of general practitioners in the quality of secondary mental health services. 
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether representatives of allied health professionals will have a permanent role on the NHS National Commissioning Board under the proposals in the Health White Paper. 
Anne Milton: Effective general practitioner-led commissioning will require the full range of clinical and professional input alongside that of local people. Allied health professionals will all have a vital role to play, with a real opportunity to develop services and improve the health outcomes of their local populations. The NHS Commissioning Board will also need to have access to appropriate professional advice in carrying out its functions. The forthcoming health Bill will set out further details about the membership of the Board and the process for making appointments.
Mr Simon Burns: The NHS Commissioning Board will be free to take decisions about how best to discharge its responsibilities. The shadow Board will be considering options during 2011-12 as it prepares to take on its full responsibilities from April 2012.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will place in the Library a copy of each letter of advice provided by KPMG to NHS
Herefordshire and its predecessor organisation on the value for money of the private finance initiative contract for Hereford County Hospital. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|