1-20 of 803 results for dept:"Ministry of Defence"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.342 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.032 seconds
- Search query
- dept:"Ministry of Defence"
- We searched for
- department_t:"Ministry of Defence" OR department_t:MOD OR department_ses:45998 OR answeringDept_ses:45998
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what discussions he has had with (a) the United States and (b) Australia on the potential merits of expanding Pillar II of the AUKUS agreement to include Canada.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what discussions he has had with (a) the United States and (b) Australia on the potential merits of expanding Pillar II of the AUKUS agreement to include Canada.
The Defence Secretary has regular, routine engagements with his US and Australia counterparts on a number of topics related to AUKUS, including potential collaborators on individual Pillar 2 projects, and will continue to do so.
Maintaining freedom of passage through the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap is an essential task for NATO, particularly for the resupply of Europe in times of war. Does the Secretary of State agree that there is an equally big threat from half the Russian fleet being in the Arctic? Will he join us on Thursday 8 July at a symposium that we and NATO are holding jointly in Portcullis House to discuss defence in the Arctic?
Maintaining freedom of passage through the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap is an essential task for NATO, particularly for the resupply of Europe in times of war. Does the Secretary of State agree that there is an equally big threat from half the Russian fleet being in the Arctic? Will he join us on Thursday 8 July at a symposium that we and NATO are holding jointly in Portcullis House to discuss defence in the Arctic?
That is a very important point, and questions have already been raised today about the size of the Russian fleet, what it is doing and where it is active. I will have to check the date, rather than answer my hon. Friend from the Dispatch Box, but I am much predisposed to attend the symposium.
I would like to add to the warm words said about my right hon. Friend. He has been particularly supportive of the all-party parliamentary group for the armed forces, and the armed forces parliamentary scheme, both of which I chair. Does he agree that the sovereign base areas in Cyprus have a particularly important role to play in our activities in the Red sea?
I would like to add to the warm words said about my right hon. Friend. He has been particularly supportive of the all-party parliamentary group for the armed forces, and the armed forces parliamentary scheme, both of which I chair. Does he agree that the sovereign base areas in Cyprus have a particularly important role to play in our activities in the Red sea?
Cyprus is in an incredibly important strategic location, which means that it is of great use to our operations in the southern Red sea, as well as in the eastern Mediterranean, the western Balkans, central Asia and beyond. It is a vital mountain base for so much that the UK armed forces do. We are incredibly fortunate to have that facility.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how much VAT was paid by his Department to HM Treasury in each of the last three years; whether such payments are notional balance sheet transactions; and whether such payment count towards the NATO target of two percent of GDP spent on...
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how much VAT was paid by his Department to HM Treasury in each of the last three years; whether such payments are notional balance sheet transactions; and whether such payment count towards the NATO target of two percent of GDP spent on...
The table below provides details of VAT paid and not recovered by MOD’s main VAT registration for the previous three financial years (FY).
VAT paid by HMRC and not recovered £million | |
FY20/21 | 3,026 |
FY21/22 | 3,143 |
FY22/23 | 3,607 |
Total | 9,776 |
These payments are not notional balance sheet transactions. They are are actual cash payments made by MOD and are accordingly considered part of the Department’s spend for NATO purposes.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which pensions his Department has responsibility for are counted towards the NATO target of spending two percent of GDP on defence; and what the value of such pension payments was in the latest period for which figures are available.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which pensions his Department has responsibility for are counted towards the NATO target of spending two percent of GDP on defence; and what the value of such pension payments was in the latest period for which figures are available.
Under NATO guidance pensions for defence personnel form part of qualifying defence spend. This includes both military pensions and Ministry of Defence civil servants. For Financial Year 2022-23, this is £1,523 million and £123 million respectively.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 26 February 2024 to Question 13866 on Chinook Helicopters: Accidents, what personal information is held about third party individuals; and whether those individuals are alive.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 26 February 2024 to Question 13866 on Chinook Helicopters: Accidents, what personal information is held about third party individuals; and whether those individuals are alive.
The closed records held at The National Archives contain personal information relating to third party individuals involved with the board of inquiry and of the next of kin.
It is assumed that all individuals are alive and the early release of this information would breach their data protection rights. This will be reconsidered during the Ministry of Defence’s business as usual activity to renew the Retention Instrument associated with the closed records due to take place in 2029.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of removing the 100 year classification of documents relating to the 1994 Mull of Kintyre Chinook disaster.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of removing the 100 year classification of documents relating to the 1994 Mull of Kintyre Chinook disaster.
The closed records held at The National Archives contain personal information relating to 3rd party individuals. The early release of this information would breach those individuals’ data protection rights. As part of MOD’s business as usual activity to renew the Retention Instrument associated with these closed records, an assessment of the potential merit of removing the 100-year closure status is due to take place in 2029.
The whole House would like to see a larger Army, Navy and Air Force—there is unanimity on that point. Central to that must be not only the armed forces recruitment programme, but the Army centralised training scheme. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the pause in capital spending by the MOD, which was announced last week in the press, will not affect those two schemes, and that they will continue in as full-blooded a way as they are at the moment?
The whole House would like to see a larger Army, Navy and Air Force—there is unanimity on that point. Central to that must be not only the armed forces recruitment programme, but the Army centralised training scheme. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the pause in capital spending by the MOD, which was announced last week in the press, will not affect those two schemes, and that they will continue in as full-blooded a way as they are at the moment?
My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that there is no pause. The approvals are flowing.
I know that the Minister and most of the House, leaving aside those on the Scottish National Benches, will agree that the continuous at-sea deterrent is absolutely central to the defence of the realm—there is no question about that at all. Does he agree that we must find a way of replacing Trident within budget, and that the worst possible thing that could happen to Trident would be an SNP Government in Scotland?
I know that the Minister and most of the House, leaving aside those on the Scottish National Benches, will agree that the continuous at-sea deterrent is absolutely central to the defence of the realm—there is no question about that at all. Does he agree that we must find a way of replacing Trident within budget, and that the worst possible thing that could happen to Trident would be an SNP Government in Scotland?
I agree 100% with my hon. Friend.
Is my right hon. Friend concerned about the volcanic activity in Iceland at the moment? The P-8 regularly uses Keflavik airport near Reykjavik. Could that be interrupted by the threatened volcanic activity?
Is my right hon. Friend concerned about the volcanic activity in Iceland at the moment? The P-8 regularly uses Keflavik airport near Reykjavik. Could that be interrupted by the threatened volcanic activity?
To the relief of people everywhere hoping for a Christmas getaway, I am told that this particular volcanic ash is not the same as that of last time and thus does not pose such a threat to aviation. However, we are, of course, monitoring it carefully and have contingencies.
This House as a whole provides vociferous support for our veterans of all kinds, particularly through the mechanism of the all-party parliamentary group for the armed forces. Perhaps I can take this opportunity to pay tribute to Miss Amy Swash, who has now run the APPG for me for eight years, but will sadly leave us shortly for other jobs. I thank her for all the work she has done for a superb amount of time, in particular to raise the plight of veterans.
This House as a whole provides vociferous support for our veterans of all kinds, particularly through the mechanism of the all-party parliamentary group for the armed forces. Perhaps I can take this opportunity to pay tribute to Miss Amy Swash, who has now run the APPG for me for eight years, but will sadly leave us shortly for other jobs. I thank her for all the work she has done for a superb amount of time, in particular to raise the plight of veterans.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right and I add my tributes to his. I also express my admiration for the armed forces parliamentary scheme, which does a fantastic job in informing and educating colleagues.
One group of veterans to whom a gross injustice was done many years ago is the LGBT community, who until 2001 were court-martialled, shamed and dismissed. That shame is still with them today and has not yet been corrected. The Government perfectly properly commissioned a report by Lord Etherton to look into the whole matter, and I understand it was provided last week. Will the Government undertake to produce that report and make an oral statement to this House to discuss it? Above all, will they give the apology it calls for and accept the need for financial compensation that those veterans deserve?
One group of veterans to whom a gross injustice was done many years ago is the LGBT community, who until 2001 were court-martialled, shamed and dismissed. That shame is still with them today and has not yet been corrected. The Government perfectly properly commissioned a report by Lord Etherton to look into the whole matter, and I understand it was provided last week. Will the Government undertake to produce that report and make an oral statement to this House to discuss it? Above all, will they give the apology it calls for and accept the need for financial compensation that those veterans deserve?
I suspect I will be asked the same question on Saturday, when I attend London Pride. The Etherton report has been delivered. It is pretty magisterial, as we would expect from Terence Etherton, with a number of recommendations that we are working through. When we respond, it will be a proper response, and I hope it will satisfy my hon. Friend.
There is one group of veterans to whom a terrible injustice was done many years ago, namely LGBTQ+ soldiers, sailors and airmen from before 2001 who lost their rank, who were dismissed and who lost their pensions—to this day, none of that has been restored. The Government have appointed Lord Etherton to look into this matter and to try to right some of those wrongs. When will his report be brought before the House? Will there be an oral statement on the matter so that we can cross-examine Ministers on it? Is the Minister confident that he will now find a way of righting these dreadful wrongs?
There is one group of veterans to whom a terrible injustice was done many years ago, namely LGBTQ+ soldiers, sailors and airmen from before 2001 who lost their rank, who were dismissed and who lost their pensions—to this day, none of that has been restored. The Government have appointed Lord Etherton to look into this matter and to try to right some of those wrongs. When will his report be brought before the House? Will there be an oral statement on the matter so that we can cross-examine Ministers on it? Is the Minister confident that he will now find a way of righting these dreadful wrongs?
I personally agree very much with the sentiments of my hon. Friend’s question. The way that gay people were treated during their service in the armed forces at an earlier time does not reflect the values of the modern British armed forces. The review will be here soon, I am told, and we will make sure that its lessons are learned and adopted by the Department.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether he has had discussions with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of increasing armed forces pay in line with inflation; and whether he has made a comparative assessment of the wages of armed forces staff and the wages of public service...
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether he has had discussions with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of increasing armed forces pay in line with inflation; and whether he has made a comparative assessment of the wages of armed forces staff and the wages of public service...
The annual remit for the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body (AFPRB) and Defence’s annual affordability for the AFPRB’s annual pay award are both agreed with Ministerial colleagues.
Last year, the independent AFPRB recommended a 3.75% uplift in pay and other targeted measures, including a 1% cap on accommodation charges. At the same time, the independent Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB) recommended a 3.5% award to the most senior officers at two-Star rank and above. All these recommendations were accepted in full. Evidence for this year has been provided to both the AFPRB and SSRB and we are awaiting their 2023 reports.
In determining their recommendations, the pay review bodies operate within their respective remits. For the AFPRB, this explicitly includes comparative assessments with other workforces as part of their consideration of the need for the pay of the Armed Forces to be broadly comparable with pay levels in civilian life.
The whole House will be delighted to see you back in your seat, Madam Deputy Speaker. I pay tribute to the Secretary of State and the entire team for the battle they have fought with the Treasury over the past few weeks, but the £5 billion is disappointing, particularly if £3 billion goes to AUKUS, and £1.9 billion goes to filling up our warehouses. It actually means a cut in defence spending, rather than an increase. Nevertheless, I was encouraged by what the Secretary of State said a moment ago about the Budget on Wednesday, and various other remarks that seem to indicate that there may be more money to come. Am I being over-optimistic?
The whole House will be delighted to see you back in your seat, Madam Deputy Speaker. I pay tribute to the Secretary of State and the entire team for the battle they have fought with the Treasury over the past few weeks, but the £5 billion is disappointing, particularly if £3 billion goes to AUKUS, and £1.9 billion goes to filling up our warehouses. It actually means a cut in defence spending, rather than an increase. Nevertheless, I was encouraged by what the Secretary of State said a moment ago about the Budget on Wednesday, and various other remarks that seem to indicate that there may be more money to come. Am I being over-optimistic?
As my hon. Friend will know, all Departments are within their current comprehensive spending agreement, and the next comprehensive spending review is due in 18 months to two years’ time. Although all Departments, including those of Defence, Transport, and Health and Social Care suffer from pressures with higher inflation, it is right to ensure that we live within the envelope and, where possible, seek relief for a range of challenges. That is what I have been seeking for the next two years with the Treasury. I have also said consistently that the most important thing is the headmark for the long-term direction of defence spending, so that it is no longer declining, as it has done for the past three decades, but is on an upward trajectory. Since 2020, it has been on that upward trajectory. This grant of extra money continues that momentum, which is incredibly important, and I hope that the headmark will soon be announced in detail.
The Secretary of State will be aware of a resolution recently passed by the Russian Duma that no vessel whether merchant or
Royal Navy should pass through the waters to the north of Russia without both permission from the Russians and Russian personnel on board. Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to reassure me that if a Royal Navy vessel of any kind wants to transit through the northern sea route, either above the water or beneath it, we will do so without let or hindrance from the Russian Federation?
The Secretary of State will be aware of a resolution recently passed by the Russian Duma that no vessel whether merchant or
Royal Navy should pass through the waters to the north of Russia without both permission from the Russians and Russian personnel on board. Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to reassure me that if a Royal Navy vessel of any kind wants to transit through the northern sea route, either above the water or beneath it, we will do so without let or hindrance from the Russian Federation?
One of the international treaties with the most signatures on it is on freedom of navigation across all seas. The United Kingdom stands strongly behind that and will uphold it wherever we can, hence our transit of HMS Defender in the Black sea. We will do that wherever we are able to do so in accordance with international law, and we will not be intimidated by Russia or any other nation.
I welcome my right hon. and gallant Friend to his well-deserved place on the Front Bench. I look forward to working with him over the years.
My right hon. and gallant Friend will know that in Wiltshire alone we have 7,000 service children in our schools and that some 96% of all schools in Wiltshire have service kids in them, many of whom benefit from the services pupil premium. That is great, but it ends at age 16. Surely there is an argument in favour of continuing to help those children from 16 to 18, as we have changed the education system as a whole and education at 18 has become the norm.
I welcome my right hon. and gallant Friend to his well-deserved place on the Front Bench. I look forward to working with him over the years.
My right hon. and gallant Friend will know that in Wiltshire alone we have 7,000 service children in our schools and that some 96% of all schools in Wiltshire have service kids in them, many of whom benefit from the services pupil premium. That is great, but it ends at age 16. Surely there is an argument in favour of continuing to help those children from 16 to 18, as we have changed the education system as a whole and education at 18 has become the norm.
I am very grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend and near neighbour. He invites me to ensure that Wiltshire gets more cash, in particular the excellent Wiltshire College. That is very tempting indeed. I hear what he says, and nobody is keener than I am on improving skills, particularly post 16. I am more than happy to discuss the issue with him, but I suspect that what he suggests would have a significant price tag and our colleagues in the Treasury would rather I did not commit.
I think it was at his keynote speech to the land warfare conference that the Chief of the General Staff made his oft-quoted remarks that this was “our 1937 moment”, that it was “perverse” to cut 10,000 people from the Army and that we would be at risk of being “outnumbered” in the event of warfare. Can the Secretary of State tell me whether that speech was cleared through his office before CGS gave it?
I think it was at his keynote speech to the land warfare conference that the Chief of the General Staff made his oft-quoted remarks that this was “our 1937 moment”, that it was “perverse” to cut 10,000 people from the Army and that we would be at risk of being “outnumbered” in the event of warfare. Can the Secretary of State tell me whether that speech was cleared through his office before CGS gave it?
Some of the characteristics that my hon. Friend mentions were not in the speech. The Chief of the General Staff did not say it was perverse to cut 10,000 troops—he did say it was a 1937 moment. The important thing about 1937 was not only that General Montgomery had talked about mobilisation, but that he had talked about ensuring that the force was relevant. If you have a big mass force that is irrelevant to modern technology, you end up like Russia, stuck on the road to Kyiv—wiped out.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many HIV positive service people were dismissed from the (a) Army, (b) Navy and (c) Air force in the latest period for which figures are available.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many HIV positive service people were dismissed from the (a) Army, (b) Navy and (c) Air force in the latest period for which figures are available.
Between 1 April 2011 and 31 March 2022, 30 UK Regular Armed Forces personnel were medically discharged with an ICD-10 code for HIV cited as the principal or contributory cause. Both principal and contributory causes have been included as it is possible for personnel to be medically discharged for multiple medical reasons. Of the 30 personnel, 24 were Army personnel. The number of Royal Navy and RAF personnel were fewer than five respectively.
Figures include trained and untrained UK Regular personnel; Reserve personnel are excluded. Army Regular personnel include Gurkha and the Military Provost Guard Service. Royal Navy personnel includes both Royal Navy and Royal Marines. In line with Joint Service Publication 200, figures fewer than five have been suppressed.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, until what date HIV positive status was a bar to military service; on what evidence was that bar to military service based; and if he will make a statement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, until what date HIV positive status was a bar to military service; on what evidence was that bar to military service based; and if he will make a statement.
On 21 June 2022, the HIV positive status bar was lifted with amendments being made to the Joint Service Manual of Medical Fitness (Leaflet 6-7-7 of Joint Service Publication 950).
The original policy and its amendment were based on specialist medical opinion. This included consideration of the risk to the individual if they were denied essential medication or access to specialist medical services due to operational circumstances; the risk to everyone operating in the military exposure prone environment in the UK and overseas; and the cost-benefit of training an individual with a chronic medical condition, that would previously have attracted career restrictions in a fixed liability organisation.