Author: admin

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-09-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they made of the risks to national security and to service personnel before publishing the names of soldiers and potential recruits online.

Earl Howe

The Armed Forces have a long history of publishing a nominal roll of serving officers, in the form of the ‘The Navy List’, ‘The Army List’ and the ‘The Air Force List’, generically known as the Armed Forces Lists.

The Armed Forces Lists’ information was first published online in 2014, following requests under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act and as part of our overall commitment to transparency. This information was judged to be releasable, having previously been published annually for over 200 years.

In September 2015, the policy on the publication of the Armed Forces Lists was reviewed and a decision was made to significantly reduce the information published, limiting this to information on officers at one star rank (Brigadier and equivalents) and above, except in respect of the Royal Navy. Details of those officers commanding a warship would continue to be published through release of a suitable version of the ‘Fleet Bridge Card’, which provides information on the number of RN Senior officers in command of the Fleet, the Flotillas and the warships. This decision was informed by advice on security risks. The previous Service Lists published on the Gov.uk website have now been removed.

Names of soldiers at Warrant Officer rank and below and potential recruits have never been published online in the Armed Forces Lists.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-09-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they made of Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, and its role in Yemen, before announcing that the UK would continue to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The UK Government takes its arms export responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust arms export control regimes in the world. All export licence applications are assessed on a case-by-case basis against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria, taking account of all relevant factors at the time of the application.

Risks around human rights violations are a key part of our assessment against the Consolidated Criteria. We do not export equipment where we assess there is a clear risk that it might be used for internal repression, or would provoke or prolong conflict within a country, or where we assess there is a clear risk that the intended recipient would use the items aggressively against another country. Export licensing requires us to consider how the equipment will be used by the end-user. This is done by reference to all currently available and relevant information at the time of application. A licence will not be issued, for any country, if to do so would be inconsistent with any provision of the mandatory Criteria, including where we assess there is a clear risk that it might be used in the commission of a serious violation of International Humanitarian Law.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-09-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the remarks by Lord Prior of Brampton on 22 October 2015 (HL Deb, col GC37), what progress has been made in establishing across the country a network of NHS practitioners interested in Lyme disease.

Lord Prior of Brampton

We will be considering options for improving professional engagement on Lyme disease in light of the reviews on the diagnosis, treatment and transmission of Lyme disease, commissioned by the Department to inform future decision making. Public Health England continues to work with local authorities and primary care providers to raise awareness.