Tag: David Davis

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, pursuant to the Answer of 16 September 2015 to Question 9748, on counter-terrorism, on what date the meeting of the most senior members of the National Security Council referred to in that Answer took place.

    Mr Oliver Letwin

    Senior members of the National Security Council meet frequently to discuss matters of national security but we do not disclose information about the detail of these internal proceedings and discussions.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-03-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment of the merits of the Protector drone and other current and projected UK capability requirements was made to underpin the recent £1.5 billion UK-France collaboration on a joint unmanned combat air vehicle.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    As part of last year’s Strategic Defence and Security Review, we conducted a comprehensive assessment of our future capability requirements including for combat air. Within this, we looked at what could be provided by current and planned capabilities including Protector. The next phase of our collaboration on Unmanned Combat Air Systems with France will mature advanced technologies to inform future acquisition choices.

    As part of last year’s Strategic Defence and Security Review, we conducted a comprehensive assessment of our future capability requirements including for combat air. Within this, we looked at what could be provided by current and planned capabilities including Protector. The next phase of our collaboration on Unmanned Combat Air Systems with France is looking at capability need beyond Protector and so will mature advanced technologies to develop operational demonstrators.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the written statement of 20 July 2015, HCWS 149, whether his Department has completed its collation of information on UK personnel embedded on operations; and whether he plans for that collation to include information on intelligence analysts and RPAS operators working remotely.

    Michael Fallon

    I refer my right hon. Friend to my Written Ministerial Statement of 17 December 2015 (HCWS431) which details UK Service personnel embedded in another nations’ armed forces, who are deployed on operations together with those who work on operations in deployed coalition or single nation headquarters roles. Intelligence analysts or remotely piloted air systems operators meeting this criteria would be included in the data but for personal and operational security reasons these numbers will not be separately identified.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will place a copy of his Department’s (a) civilian casualty review procedure and (b) standard operating procedure in the Library.

    Penny Mordaunt

    I am withholding publication of the UK Armed Forces’ Incident Reporting Standing Operating Procedure, which contains the civilian casualty review process, as disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness, or security of our Armed Forces.

    The UK takes all allegations of civilian casualties very seriously. Robust processes are in place to review reports of civilian casualties and to launch investigations where required.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Prime Minister, whether he plans to commission any review of the drone strike against Reyaad Khan on 21 August 2015 aside from the review being undertaken by the Intelligence and Security Committee.

    Mr David Cameron

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Ms West) on 21 January 2016, UIN 22720.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2016 to Question 23886, whether asset-sharing in Syria, Iraq or Libya was considered at the meeting of the Reaper User Group that took place on 14 to 18 March.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The MQ-9 Users Group primarily discussed generic, future interoperability between US, UK, French and Italian Reaper operators, particularly in terms of software standards, logistics and training. The sharing of assets in Syria, Iraq and Libya was therefore not discussed explicitly.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the Answer of 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for West Bromwich East to Question 222431, if he will place in the Library a copy of the Reaper User Group terms of reference.

    Penny Mordaunt

    Discussions with partner nations are continuing about the release of the Terms of Reference of the Reaper User Group.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 10 March 2016 to Question 30084, if he will make the Attorney General’s advice available for inspection by the (a) Chief of the Air Staff (b) Deputy Commander of Operations and (c) Staff Branch Air Command responsible for authorisation of the drone strike which killed Reyaad Khan on 21 August 2015.

    Michael Fallon

    No. Military action is authorised in accordance with the Rules of Engagement which I approve in accordance with the legal position.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 23 November 2015 to the hon. Member for Bolton South East to Question 16740, to what extent his Department uses US contractors for the training of UK Reaper operators and support personnel.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The United States Air Force makes use of contractors in order to deliver Reaper training to both UK and their own Reaper crews (pilots and sensor operators). Contractors deliver the majority of Ground School and Simulator training, with a smaller proportion involved in Flying training. I can confirm that no support personnel are trained by US contractors.

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether the Government approved or was consulted on the US airstrike in Syria that killed Junaid Hussain on 24 August 2015.

    Michael Fallon

    We work closely with the United States: we do not, however, comment on the specific details of US intentions.