Oral answer to question provided on Monday, 22 March 2010 in the House of Lords, by Lord Tunnicliffe (Labour).

Defence: Nimrod Crash

Answer: I assume we are talking about the two officers who have retired. It is true that the DLO was required to make these savings. It was expected that efficiencies would be made as a result of restructuring the Defence Logistics Organisation, merging three organisations into one, so it was indeed a government policy for which the Government were responsible. We have commented elsewhere that we have to see whether our systems can be improved to make sure that financial pressures never come into safety decisions. Indeed, we have affirmed that we are putting safety first.

This is an answer to the Oral question asked on Monday, 22 March 2010 by Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat).

Question: My Lords, first, I associate myself and these Benches with the condolences that have been expressed to the families and friends of the soldiers of the 1st Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment who were killed in action. Will the Minister confirm that these officers were carrying out government policy when they were serving? If not, why were they still allowed to serve?

Secondary information

Type: Oral answer to question
Reference: 718 c751
Session: 2009-10
Chamber / Committee: House of Lords chamber
Subjects: Defence Accidents Expenditure Peacekeeping operations Afghanistan Defence Logistics Organisation Nimrod aircraft Nimrod Review Pledger, Malcolm Cowan, Sam
Link: View this Oral answer to question on www.publications.parliament.uk