|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Bill Rammell: The storage of US munitions on bases made available to the US Visiting Force is governed by a UK/US Memorandum of Agreement dated October 1997, entitled "The Import, Export, Transportation, Safety, Security, Storage and Disposal of US Explosives and Weapons in the UK and the Approval, Use and Safety of Ground Ranges".
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Morley and Rothwell of 23 February 2009, Official Report, column 25W, on cluster munitions, whether agreement has yet been reached with US Visiting Forces on removal of cluster munitions stored at US bases in the UK. 
Since the UK adopted the convention on cluster munitions in May 2008 there have been ongoing discussions with the US with regard to their cluster munition stockpiles and necessity of having stockpiles on UK territory. The US has identified the
cluster munitions on UK territory as exceeding their worldwide operational planning requirements. Baroness Kinnock during the Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill Second Reading in the House of Lords on 8 December 2009, Official Report, column 1020, announced that these cluster munitions will be removed from sites in the UK in 2010 and from all UK territories by 2013.
Bill Rammell: The United States stores various weapons in the UK. The US inventory of weapons is declared annually to the Ministry of Defence who ensure that all weapons are appropriately licensed and stored. It would be inappropriate to disclose the numbers, types and locations of such weapons. Therefore, I am withholding the detailed information as its disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and another state.
However, I can confirm that the US has identified their cluster munitions on UK territory as exceeding their worldwide operational planning requirements. Therefore, these cluster munitions will be removed from sites in the UK in 2010 and from all UK territories by 2013, as declared by Baroness Kinnock during the Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill Second Reading in the House of Lords on 8 December 2009, Official Report, column 1020.
Bill Rammell: The US has identified the cluster munitions on UK territory as exceeding their worldwide operational planning requirements. Baroness Kinnock during the Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill Second Reading in the House of Lords on 8 December 2009, Official Report, column 1020, announced that these cluster munitions will be removed from sites in the UK in 2010 and from all UK territories by 2013.
Bill Rammell: The only UK cluster munitions in service on 30 May 2008 were the Extended Range Bomblet Shell (ERBS) L20A1 M85 and the CRV-7 Multi-Purpose Sub Munition (MPSM). All other UK cluster munitions were withdrawn from service prior to this date.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many requests for information as defined by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 were received by his Department in 2009; and how many of those requests (a) received a full response within 40 working days and (b) remain outstanding. 
Mr. Kevan Jones: Statistics on requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 are published by the Ministry of Justice. Statistics for the quarter 1 October to 31 December 2009, and annual statistics for 2009, will be published by the Ministry of Justice on 29 April 2010. Releasing these statistics before this date would contravene the provisions of the Pre-release Access to Official Statistics Order which came into effect on 1 December 2008.
Statistics for the first three quarters of 2009 have been published by the Ministry of Justice, and relevant extracts are shown in the table. Information is collected on the number of requests which receive a response within the statutory response time of 20 working days, those which receive a response within permitted extensions to this period ("in time"), and those which have not been answered at the time of reporting to the Ministry of Justice. Information on the number of responses sent within 40 working days is not collected and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
|Period||Requests received||Full response sent within 20 working days||Full response sent " in time "||Response outstanding at time of reporting|
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what methodology his Department used to determine whether answers to questions in the formulation if he will set out with statistical information related as directly as possible to the tabling hon. Member's constituency the effects on that constituency of his Department's policies since 1997 could be provided without incurring disproportionate cost; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The disproportionate cost threshold, which is the advisory cost limit at which Departments can refuse to answer a written PQ, is £800. It is calculated by reference to the cost to the Department of those involved in answering the question, specifically the personnel costs calculated on hourly rates. Answering questions of this formulation did not exceed this level.
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what methodology his Department used to estimate the number of veterans in prison in England and Wales; whether (a) reservists, (b) people serving before 1979, (c) people whose date of birth was unavailable, (d) persons whose first name was unavailable, (e) under 18 year olds, (f) females who had changed their name following marriage and (g) persons with aliases were included in his Department's estimate; and what the prison population was on the date on which the data on veterans in the prison system were extracted. 
Mr. Kevan Jones: I refer the hon. Member to the answers given by the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle) on 2 March 2010, Official Report, columns 1067-68W.
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 22 March 2010, Official Report, column 13W, on Group 4 Securicor, what discussions his Department's officials have had with Group 4 Securicor on outsourcing services referred to in the unprinted paper reported to the House by the Defence Committee on 10 February 2010; and if he will make a statement. 
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) which Gurkha veterans' charities his Department has met to discuss implementation of the Government's policy on the settlement of ex-Gurkhas; 
(2) which Gurkha charities have received funding from his Department following the decision to grant ex-Gurkhas UK settlement rights; and how much such funding each of those charities has received. 
Mr. Kevan Jones: The Ministry of Defence has met with a number of service charities to discuss the mechanisms put in place to support those Gurkha veterans and their dependants who decide to come to settle in the UK under the new immigration rules. These meetings included the Gurkha Welfare Trust, which is the only charity established specifically for the relief of poverty and distress among Gurkha ex-servicemen of the British Crown and their dependants in Nepal. The Ministry of Defence has provided an annual grant to the Gurkha Welfare Trust since it was established in 1969. This grant, which currently amounts to just over £1 million per year, contributes towards the administrative costs of the trust's field arm operating in Nepal, the Gurkha Welfare Scheme.
Bill Rammell: The transfer of most fast jet test flying and some evaluation activities, including 11 military and three QinetiQ posts, from Boscombe Down to RAF Coningsby is expected to result in a range of time, cost and performance benefits across Defence, including the more efficient use of flying hours, and an enhanced ability to meet the requirements of the front-line user, through the integration of developmental and operational test and evaluation activity.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent on translation services by her Department in (a) Ribble Valley, (b) Lancashire and (c) the UK in each of the last five years. 
1. Face to face.
3. Translating by a range of services which includes the translation of departmental information leaflets and other documents that are provided to customers in a range of ethnic languages, audio and Braille, as well as all publications for Welsh-speaking customers living in Wales.
4. We are also able to offer an ad-hoc service to convert documents into Easy Read format. Spend for Easy Read has in the past been included within other category spend and so cannot be identified without incurring disproportionate cost.
The contractual arrangements for the services have been developed over a number of years and as a result spend has not been applicable for some of these services in each of the last five years or data have not been able to be gathered for spend during some years. Disproportionate cost would be incurred in trying to identify such spend.
|Type of translation service||2004-05||2005-06||2006-07||2007-08||2008-09|
|n/a = not available without incurring disproportionate cost as data not held centrally or is combined within other category data and not possible to separate. (1) This figure includes all translation spend for the International Pensions Centre (IPC) which previously was not held centrally-total £381,370.59 for 2008-09.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|