|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many times the Truck Cargo Heavy Duty convoy has had to return to base with its journey uncompleted for each reason in the last three years. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: The term "Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected" or "MRAP" is a term used within the United States armed forces, and encapsulates a family of protected vehicles. Force Protection Industries have supplied Cougar vehicles for the US MRAP programme; two of these vehicles, the Cougar 4x4 and Cougar 6x6, are the base vehicles for the Mastiff and Ridgback protected vehicles in service with the UK armed forces.
Mastiff and Ridgback were acquired following assessments against a range of key requirements and ability to deliver within Urgent Operational Requirement timelines. Since their entry into service, these vehicles have an excellent protection record and are vehicles of choice for commanders.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the answer to the hon. Member for North Devon of 10 November 2009, Official Report, column 231W, on the Atomic Weapons Establishment: floods, when he expects discussions with insurers on the costs arising from the July 2007 flooding at the Atomic Weapons Establishment to be concluded. 
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: Following analysis by Ministry of Defence officials of the Atomic Weapons Establishment Management Ltd. (AWEML) report on this issue, the matter has largely been concluded. Only one minor item remains to be agreed between AWEML and one of its contractors. It is anticipated that this will be resolved within three months.
Mr. Quentin Davies: The Ministry of Defence has procured a range of hand-held metal detecting equipments that can be used for detecting mines and IEDs. Costs are only available from financial year 2006-07, the year of initial purchase, for the current primary equipment and are broken down as follows:
|Equipment||Acquisition cost||Maintenance cost|
In addition, approximately £3 million in total over the last 10 years has been spent on a range of specialist metal detectors. To break this figure down further, could be done only at disproportionate cost.
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) grammar, (b) comprehensive and (c) academy schools had operational Combined Cadet Forces in the last year for which figures are available. 
State grammar schools: 22;
State academies: 4;
Other state schools: 34.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 9 February 2010, Official Report, columns 811-12W, on chemical weapons: animals, what the reasons are for the increase in the number of non-human primate tests between 2008-09; and whether any such tests have been conducted on human beings since 2005. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: The number of procedures conducted on animals depends on the demand from the MOD research programme. The increase in the number of procedures returned by Dstl involving non-human primates in 2009 is due to the maturity of long term projects within the research programme. One of these projects concerns the development of new medical countermeasures which require the development of a non-human primate model of human infection. The model is required for the regulatory approval of new medical countermeasures to a range of bacterial and viral infections which are relevant in both military and civilian environments.
The other factor that contributed to the rise in numbers is another project which followed on from earlier studies conducted in a rodent species. These studies determined a necessity for work in a species closer to man to assess the clinical effects of the inhalation of various chemical materials.
The studies undertaken at Dstl Porton Down with human participants do not involve the use of chemical warfare agents. Studies involving the use of service volunteers since 2005 have included the assessment of candidate prophylactic and therapeutic drugs, and the physiological and psychological impact of wearing various combinations of personal protective clothing, including respirators.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 14 December 2009, Official Report, column 825W, on the Defence Nuclear Weapon Regulator, what the (a) terms of reference and (b) mission and objectives are of the Defence Nuclear Weapon Regulator. 
Mr. Kevan Jones: As explained in my answer on 14 December 2009, Official Report, column 825W, the Nuclear Weapon Regulator is an officer within the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR). The mission/objective of DNSR is to regulate the nuclear and radiological safety of the defence nuclear programmes so that they are managed with due regard for the protection of the work force, the public and the environment. As an individual, the Nuclear Weapon Regulator does not have a mission separate from that of the DNSR team as a whole.
To give permission for nuclear activities on the basis of formal safety submissions, reviews and inspections.
To approve/agree nuclear safety submissions and safety management arrangements.
To offer formal regulatory advice to the authorisee's representatives.
To direct the postponement or cessation of specific nuclear weapons programme activity.
To assess the demonstration of emergency arrangements.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his most recent estimate is of the budget outturn of the Defence Technology and Innovation Centre for 2009-10; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: The current 2009-10 outturn forecast for the Defence Technology and Innovation Centre is £308 million. This can be split into research expenditure of £303 million and operating costs of £5 million.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent assessment he has made of the value for money of the Defence Technology and Innovation Centre; and if he will make a statement. 
The review determined that in the interests of achieving the best value for money from MOD's S&T investment, the science|innovation|technology top-level budget (SIT TLB) should stand down, with its tasks integrated in the future by the Centre TLB and the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl). The Defence Technology and Innovation Centre (DTIC) is a part of SIT and thus it too will be standing down.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department received from (a) renting and (b) leasing its housing stock in Scotland to private companies or individuals in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Kevan Jones: Service family accommodation (SFA) is provided to accommodate entitled service personnel and their families. However, where there is no short-to-medium term requirement for SFA, but a long-term requirement remains, the Department will do all it can to make properties available to the wider community.
While information for the last five years could be provided only at disproportionate cost, there are at present 15 SFA properties leased to Moray council for use as social housing at an annual rent of £3,600 per property. This arrangement began in 2009.
In addition, Tri-Service Accommodation Regulations allow for the occupancy of available SFA by eligible civilian occupants. There are currently six eligible civilian occupants of SFA in Scotland. Civilian occupancy charges are set in accordance with local market rates and at present this totals £2,755.34 per month.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of his Department's private finance initiative projects have been delayed because of problems obtaining finance; and what the monetary value is of the contract for each such project. 
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much additional funding the UK committed to the A400M programme at the EU Defence Ministers' meeting at Palma de Mallorca on 24 to 25 February 2010. 
Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department paid to the Government Car and Despatch Agency in each of the last five years; how much it has spent on such payments in 2009-10; and what proportion of such payments was made in respect of the Government Car Service. 
Mr. Kevan Jones: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) paid £90,035 to the Government Car and Despatch Agency (GCDA) in 2008-09, wholly for the Government Car Service (GCS). This amount includes the cost of the car allocated for use by the Secretary of State for Defence as reported by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport in his written ministerial statement on 16 July 2009, Official Report, columns 79-80WS. The Secretary of State's car is provided as part of a range of security measures connected with the role. MOD payments to the GCDA so far in 2009-10 have totalled £90,535.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) Army, (b) Royal Navy and (c) Royal Air Force (i) fixed wing aircraft and (ii) helicopters are deployed in (A) Iraq, (B) Germany, (C) Afghanistan, (D) Cyprus, (E) Diego Garcia, (F) the Falkland Islands and the South Atlantic, (G) Gibraltar, (H) Kuwait, (I) Ascension Island, (J) the United Arab Emirates, (K) Oman, (L) Bahrain and (M) at sea. 
There are 12 RAF manned fixed-wing aircraft in Afghanistan. All three services have helicopters in Afghanistan and there are three Royal Navy helicopters deployed to Oman. I am withholding further information on numbers in operational theatres because it would, or would be likely to, prejudice the efficiency, security and capability of the armed forces.
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many helicopters of each type in each armed service were (a) in service, (b) in the forward fleet and (c) fit for purpose on the latest date for which figures are available. 
Aircraft defined as available (i.e. fit for purpose) are those within the forward fleet that are considered capable of carrying out their planned missions on a given date. The number of helicopters available varies from day to day due to routine maintenance requirements.
All aircraft in the forward fleet which are not available are classified as short-term unserviceable. Aircraft in this category will be undergoing first-line maintenance, other minor works or being prepared for transportation. Aircraft which are short-term unserviceable can usually be made available relatively quickly.
|Average across January 2010|
|Aircraft type||In service||Forward fleet||Available|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|