|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
9 Apr 2001 : Column: 367W
Dr. Moonie: The naming process resulted in approximately seven candidate options, all of which were subjected to a series of high-level searches. For each candidate option, its Uniform Resource Locator (URL) availability was established and existing registrations of similar company name, trademarks and URLs investigated. A cultural name check was also undertaken. The results ruled out several options mainly on the basis of URL availability.
Dr. Moonie [holding answer 4 April 2001]: In accordance with the Ministry of Defence's responsibility for promoting legitimate defence exports in co-ordination with industry, MOD has given full support to BAE Systems' bid to supply Hawk jets to India.
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the number of occasions (a) UK, (b) US, (c) Soviet and (d) other NATO aircrews in jet aircraft used cannon armament, in his assessing the need for a Eurofighter cannon. 
Mr. Hoon: The historical pattern of operations, together with the improved short-range capability of the missiles with which Eurofighter will be armed, were taken into account in our assessment that the minimal value of a cannon on Eurofighter is more than outweighed by its considerable associated costs and disadvantages.
The last occasion on which the UK used a cannon in air-to-air combat resulted in one successful hit during the Falklands conflict. Figures for other countries are not known, but historical success rates for fighter gun attacks
9 Apr 2001 : Column: 368W
suggest a 5 per cent. combat probability of kill for the Allies late in World War II, and perhaps 10 per cent. in the Korean War. While the probability of success with guns has advanced little over the years, the performance of air-to-air missiles is now far in excess of these statistics. Similarly, the modern precision-guided munitions with which Eurofighter will be armed make firing a cannon in Eurofighter's offensive support role difficult to justify, owing to the risk of collateral damage and the increased vulnerability of the aircraft.
Mr. Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer on 22 March 2001, Official Report, column 300W, if he will request his Department's Liaison Officer in Washington to gather information on US arrangements for paying compensation to veterans who participated in chemical warfare trials in the US. 
Mr. Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will send a team of his staff to Canada to evaluate the system under which the Canadian Government provides compensation to former military personnel who have developed illnesses as a result of taking part in chemical warfare experiments. 
Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has spent to date in support of former soldiers in connection with the Saville Inquiry; of that sum how much was attributable to lawyers' fees; and how much has been budgeted for 2001-02. 
Mr. Hoon: The total cost to date to the Ministry of Defence of supporting former and serving soldiers in connection with the Saville Inquiry is £9,600,428. Of this, £8,845,503 was attributable to payment to the legal teams, covering both fees and other related costs which have not been recorded separately.
9 Apr 2001 : Column: 369W
Mrs. Ellman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many projects submitted to the Merseyside objective 1 programme have been approved; what is the total value of those projects; how many projected jobs are related to them; and if he will make a statement. 
Ms Armstrong: Priority Panels have approved 66 such projects, of which offer letters have been issued to 31 applicants and accepted by 22 of them. The total eligible value of these projects is £152 million and European Regional Development Fund grants of £59.75 million have been made towards these costs. The projects are expected to create 5,073 and safeguard 6,901 jobs.
|Source of funding||Amount (£ million)|
|Single Regeneration Budget||80.87|
|Estates Renewal Challenge Fund||54|
|Neighbourhood Renewal Fund||(1)45.2|
|New Deal for Communities||61.9|
|Partnership Investment Programme||113|
|Land Reclamation Programme||2|
(1) The Neighbourhood Renewal Fund figure is the total indicative allocation for Liverpool for 2001-04
In addition, the Merseyside objective 1 programme 1994-99 has made available approximately £338 million for the regeneration of Merseyside since 1997. Unfortunately, it is not practicable to break down this figure by district. A further £844 million of European grants will be made available for the Merseyside sub-region for the 2000-06 programming period.
Mrs. Ellman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 21 December 2000, Official Report, column 312W, how many of the Merseyside objective 1 projects referred to the State Aids Policy Unit at the Department of Trade and Industry have been assessed by the unit; when the Government Office North West was informed about those decisions; which projects have been cleared; what their total value is; how many projected jobs relate to them; and if he will make a statement. 
Ms Armstrong: The State Aids Policy Unit of the Department of Trade and Industry provided advice on 26 cases; Government Office for the North West was notified of the decisions between 22 January and 27 March 2001; 13 projects were cleared to proceed by the State Aids Unit. Of these only 10 projects will proceed through the appraisal process, with a total value of £16,806,303; they are expected to create 100 jobs.
9 Apr 2001 : Column: 370W
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|