Parliamentary Search

1-20 of 22 results for subject:"Guided weapons"

Member X
Lord Drayson

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More
Drayson, Lord (22)

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher

Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first
Armed Forces: Nuclear Deterrent

Lords debate on motion to take note of the White Paper The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent (Cm 6994). Agreed to on question.
Lead member
Lord Drayson
Answering member
Lord Howell of Guildford
Department
Ministry of Defence; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Debates
Date
24 January 2007
Reference
688 c1104-96
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: Nuclear Deterrent

rose to move, That this House takes note of the White Paper The Future of the United Kingdom’s Nuclear Deterrent. The noble Lord said: My Lords, last month the noble Baroness the Lord President of the Council made a Statement on the future of the United Kingdom’s nuclear deterrent. On...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 January 2007
Reference
688 c1104-9
House
House of Lords
Ministry of Defence: QinetiQ

My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces, the right honourable Adam Ingram, has made the following Written Ministerial Statement. I am pleased to announce that QinetiQ has been awarded the contract to operate the subsonic target element of the combined aerial target service (CATS) programme...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Department
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written statements
Date
14 December 2006
Reference
687 c201WS
House
House of Lords
Defence Industrial Strategy and Procurement

My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement. I am pleased to announce progress on the complex weapons sector of the defence industrial strategy (DIS). This sector provides key missile development capabilities to our Armed Forces. The...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Department
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written statements
Date
19 July 2006
Reference
684 c90-1WS
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, the United States announced that it is,"““considering the potential of fielding a small number of interceptor missiles in Europe””." In Washington last week, the United Kingdom was mentioned as a candidate for a possible missile defence site. The US has made no request about an interceptor site in the UK. It has said that it will continue to consult allies on missile defence issues. We expect to be engaged in those discussions. No decisions on further UK participation in missile defence have been taken.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c774-5
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, I can assure the House that we recognise the complexity and sensitivity that surround these matters. It is in the context that we have had discussions on these matters for more than 20 years with the United States as the technology surrounding the possibility of missile defence has emerged. Given the recognition of the sensitivity, I will pass on to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State the point that the noble Lord has made about the need for full consultation on these matters.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c775
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, I will pass on to my right honourable friend the noble Lord’s comments on the scope that he would wish such a debate to encompass.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c777
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, that is absolutely correct. I agree with my noble friend; it is important to say that we do not today see any threat to the United Kingdom that would require a missile defence system. That is not to say that a threat could not emerge in the future, and we must think about such threats, should they emerge. But we do not see a threat to warrant a missile defence system today.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c777
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, it is correct to say that there are different schools of thought with regard to the impact that such potential missile defence technology may have on proliferation. There are some who take the view that it would decrease the rate of proliferation by taking out the incentive to develop said weapons; there are others who feel that it would increase the complexity of development. As I have said, they are matters of some complexity, which need full consideration—not least of which is the complexity relating to the technology, which is separate to issues relating to politics and discussion.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c775-6
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, we recognise, as the noble Baroness states, that the matters are under debate. We have to look at the possibilities of the technologies surrounding missile defence in the wider defence context. Of course, any potential technology—I say ““potential”” technology—would not have any merit relating to terrorist attacks, but that is not the purpose for which it may be envisaged. However, we recognise the complexity and sensitivity of the issue and note that it would require a full debate if such a request was made to the United Kingdom.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c775
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, the matters are under discussion. The United States has indicated that it is prepared to discuss the extension of the provision of a missile defence system, should one be put in place, to provide protection to its friends and allies. Those matters are also under discussion under the auspices of NATO.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c776
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
My Lords, we have not got to the point of discussing the basis on which any such technology may or may not be sited on UK soil or anywhere in Europe, and so it would not be appropriate to get into discussion of the conditions under which such technology may be deployed.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c776
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
No, my Lords, I do not agree with that premise. Having recently been in Washington to discuss the specific matters of the JSF in the context of our strong relationship with the United States, I do not believe that that will be the case.
Answered by
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c776-7
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: US Missile Defence
What consultations they will hold on the implications of the announcement by the head of the United States Missile Defence Agency that the United Kingdom has been chosen as a prime candidate to host missiles for the United States’ missile defence system.
Asked by
Lord Wallace of Saltaire (Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Date
29 March 2006
Reference
680 c774-5
House
House of Lords
Armed Forces: Combined Aerial Target Service

My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement. I am pleased to announce that, following a competition, QinetiQ has been selected as the preferred bidder to supply and operate the subsonic target element of the Combined Aerial...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Department
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written statements
Date
20 March 2006
Reference
680 c1WS
House
House of Lords
Defence Industrial Strategy

Lords statement on the Defence Industrial Strategy.
Lead member
Lord Drayson
Department
Ministry of Defence
Type
Ministerial statements
Date
15 December 2005
Reference
676 c1405-18
House
House of Lords
Defence Industrial Strategy

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord and I will certainly read the book which he mentioned; I have not read it. I will take on board the points that the noble Lord made relating to affordability. He makes a central point, but I hope that he finds that the Defence Industrial Strategy,...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2005
Reference
676 c1418
House
House of Lords
Defence Industrial Strategy

My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their expressions of support, for which I am grateful. It reflects that we have an opportunity to strive for consensus across the House. There are many aspects of defence industrial strategy upon which we agree. This is something which we can build on. I note the...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2005
Reference
676 c1414-6
House
House of Lords
Defence Industrial Strategy

My Lords, we are clear that there are certain aspects relating to the code—the software—on the JSF that we will need to enable us to maintain and upgrade the aircraft’s through-life. We are clear in the project when that information must reach us. The project is not being delayed at...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2005
Reference
676 c1416
House
House of Lords
Defence Industrial Strategy

My Lords, I am grateful for my noble friend’s comments and note the point that he makes about the Chief Secretary smiling in the document. However, he should note that the document has been produced through tremendous collaboration with other departments—both the Treasury and the Department of Trade and Industry—and, as...
Member
Lord Drayson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2005
Reference
676 c1417
House
House of Lords