|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when his Department gave instructions to their agents to submit a planning application to Aylesbury Vale district council in respect of the Princess Mary Hospital site, RAF Halton. 
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reason his Department has submitted two identical planning applications to Aylesbury Vale district council in respect of the Princess Mary Hospital site, RAF Halton. 
Dr. Moonie [holding answer 26 November 2001]: This is known as a 'twin track' application, a practice widely used in the planning system, and one which Defence Estates uses to avoid delays in dealing with planning applications. Such a twin track approach allows one application to be appealed if the eight-week determination period has elapsed without a decision (in this case 16 weeks due to the Environmental Impact Regulations). The remaining application can be subject to further negotiations and if considered satisfactory, the outstanding appeal can then be withdrawn.
27 Nov 2001 : Column: 764W
Dr. Moonie: Cost-plus contracts are the contracting method of last resort. They now account for less than 1 per cent. of the Ministry of Defence's business (both by value and number). Within a stated limit of liability the contractor is paid all costs reasonably and properly incurred, together with a sum for profit, calculated by applying either a percentage profit or a fixed fee to the costs so incurred. The rate of profit applied to cost-plus work is calculated by reference to the Government Profit Formula which includes a "Non Risk" rate, which is set below that used for prices agreed before work commences; thus the MOD recognises the reduced risk to the contractor.
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on (a) partnering, (b) smart acquisition, (c) post-costing and (d) should-cost- data in UK defence procurement. 
Dr. Moonie: Obtaining the greatest advantage from competitive leverage at prime and sub-contract level remains our primary tool in defence procurement. Over the last three financial years, the percentage of Ministry of Defence contracts (including amendments), by value, placed by competition was as follows:
Dr. Moonie: The Integrated Project Team (IPT) was born out of Smart Procurement's objective to deliver projects within the performance, time and cost parameters approved at the time that major investment decisions are taken. The IPT is responsible for managing the project from concept to disposal.
This means that the IPT is responsible for translating the equipment capability customer's requirements into an output-based statement of what a system or equipment must do to meet these requirements. The IPT devises and
27 Nov 2001 : Column: 765W
costs equipment solutions, and produces the material required to support the customer's main gate approval, and manages the development, manufacture, in-service support and eventual disposal of the equipment.
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of contracts (a) had an agreed fixed price at the start and (b) arrived to cost and on schedule in the last 12 months. 
I am withholding information on the stockpiles of these weapons in accordance with Exemption 1 (Defence, Security and International Relations) of the Code of Practice on Access to Government information.
Mr. Swayne: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 13 November 2001, Official Report, column 630W, if he will list the representatives of the veterans community who attended his task force meeting on 6 November. 
Dr. Moonie: The veterans community was represented at the Task Force meeting on 6 November by Major General (Retired) Nigel Richards CB, OBE, Chair of the Confederation of British Service and Ex-Service Organisations (COBSEO) and by Brigadier (Retired) Ian Townsend, General Secretary of The Royal British Legion (TRBL).
Mr. Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is (a) the preferred and (b) the minimum length of runway for the A400M; and what discussions he has had with his (i) German and (ii) French counterparts about their preferred length of runway for the A400M. 
Dr. Moonie: We are not planning on the basis of 'preferred' or 'minimum' runway lengths. The requirement is to support operations at the aircraft's Maximum All Up Weight. Our preliminary assessment is that this will mean a runway length of around 8,000 feet. However, runway length requirements for A400M operations will not be confirmed until the aircraft's Performance and Flying Qualities test programme is completed, on current plans, in 2008. The Secretary of State for Defence has not discussed the issue of A400M runway lengths with his French and German counterparts.
27 Nov 2001 : Column: 766W
Dr. Moonie: We are currently reviewing our methodology on the estimation of employment figures dependent on UK defence expenditure and exports. Therefore, "UK Defence Statistics 2001" does not contain any new figures for employment. The Defence Analytical Services Agency expects to publish relevant employment estimates in the first part of 2002. I will write to my hon. Friend in due course and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Dr. Moonie: Figures covering the last 10 years are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The amount spent on developing ballistic protection over the past three years for which figures are available is:
|Year||Amount spent (£ million)|
These figures include the costs of developing ballistic protection work within the Corporate Research Programme undertaken by Dstl at Porton Down and other developmental work by the Defence Clothing and Textiles Integrated Project Team, now part of the Defence Logistics Organisation.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|