Tag: Emily Thornberry

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-01-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many and what proportion of (a) Tornado and (b) Typhoon aircraft in the Sustainment Fleet are (i) undergoing planned maintenance, (ii) undergoing upgrade work and (iii) held in temporary storage.

Mr Philip Dunne

The information requested is detailed in the attached table.

The Forward Available Fleet comprises aircraft which are serviceable and those which are short-term unserviceable. Short-term unserviceable aircraft are undergoing minor works, forward maintenance or any other rectification or technical inspection work that can arise on a day-to-day basis. Dependent on the nature of the work, aircraft may be designated as requiring either ‘short-term maintenance’ or ‘short-term works’.

The Sustainment Fleet numbers represent those aircraft in the Depth Fleet, which comprises aircraft which are undergoing planned depth maintenance or upgrade programmes.

Decommissioning and disposal are part of the same process and are therefore grouped together.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many operational defects (a) HMS Daring, (b) HMS Dauntless, (c) HMS Diamond, (d) HMS Dragon, (e) HMS Defender and (f) HMS Duncan have reported in each of the last six years.

Mr Philip Dunne

All complex systems suffer defects and require maintenance throughout their life, and warships are no exception. Operational Defects (OPDEFS) can vary in their categorisation and severity, covering minor ancillary components to major defects. The OPDEF process only applies to Ships in operational service, and I have therefore supplied the numbers for full years for Type 45 ships since their Commissioning.

TOTAL OPDEFS ON TYPE 45 SHIPS IN THE LAST SIX YEARS
	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015
HMS Daring	NA	186	184	278	163	156
HMS Dauntless	NA	NA	239	244	262	150
HMS Diamond	NA	NA	251	220	182	165
HMS Defender	NA	NA	209	224	202	209
HMS Dragon	NA	NA	260	268	235	124
HMS Duncan	NA	NA	NA	168	181	241

We would not release more detailed information related to these figures as this would allow deductions to be made about a ship’s capability and may affect operational security.

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 4 February 2016 to Question 25004, (a) for how many days (a) HMS Daring, (b) HMS Dauntless, (c) HMS Diamond, (d) HMS Dragon, (e) HMS Defender and (f) HMS Duncan were deployed on operations and (b) in which theatre they were so deployed in (i) 2011, (ii) 2012, (iii) 2013 and (iv) 2014.

Penny Mordaunt

The information requested is provided below. In answering this question, I have defined ‘deployed on operations’ as times away from UK waters for extended periods.

In 2011, the Type 42 Destroyers were deployed on operations. No Type 45 Destroyer was deployed away from the UK.

2012

Ship	Deployment	Number of Days
HMS DARING	Operation Kipion: Gulf Region	210
HMS DAUNTLESS	Atlantic Patrol Tasking (South)	209
HMS DIAMOND	Operation Kipion: Gulf Region	191

2013

Ship	Deployment	Number of Days
HMS DRAGON	Operation Kipion: Gulf Region	254
HMS DARING	Global Deployment	277

2014

Ship	Deployment	Number of Days
HMS DIAMOND	Operation Recsyr: protecting and escorting ships transporting chemicals from Syria	163
HMS DEFENDER	Operation Kipion: Gulf Region	193
HMS DRAGON	Atlantic Patrol Tasking (South)	198

When not deployed on operations, all Type 45 ships would have undertaken activities such as sea trials, training, engagement, provisioning or been in a maintenance period.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many simulators were used for military flight training in each of the last six years.

Penny Mordaunt

The information requested is provided below; it comprises both fixed wing and rotary simulators.

2015 – 41

2014 – 41

2013 – 40

2012 – 39

2011 – 39

2010 – 31

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to paragraph 4.45 of the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence Review 2015, when he expects to announce further details of the Government’s proposed new armed forces offer.

Penny Mordaunt

In order to deliver the battle-winning forces which the UK needs for the future, we are looking at developing a new "offer" for new joiners into the Armed Forces which meets the expectations of future recruits. It will ensure our future expenditure on personnel is sustainable and applied in the most efficient way. We have now begun the conceptual stages of evidence gathering and initial policy development which will determine whether the concept of a new offer is viable and when it could be delivered. We will engage stakeholders including the Armed Forces Pay Review Body as usual on our proposals when they mature. The new offer for new joiners will not impact on existing Service personnel.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence Review 2015, when he expects to announce further details of the Government’s proposed armed forces families strategy.

Mark Lancaster

The UK Armed Forces Families’ Strategy 2016-2020 was published on 14 January 2016 and is available at the following website:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-armed-forces-families-strategy

The Strategy will be supported by an action plan which we plan to publish in spring 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-03-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 15 February 2016 to Question 26146, on what programmes has contingency funding for the Defence Equipment Plan been spent in each year since 2012; and how much was spent on each programme.

Mr Philip Dunne

Centrally held contingency funding for the Defence Equipment Plan was introduced for the first time in 2012. During the 2014 Annual Budget Cycle, it was re-profiled into the later years to reflect better the level of risk in the equipment plan. As a result we have not spent any of the contingency in the years to date. However, we have allocated funding from it in future years to support specific programmes (Rotary Wing Flying Training System and Ajax Vehicles).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-03-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether it is his policy for the House to be informed after his Department’s cyber strike capability has been used in cases where urgent action has been required such that it has not been possible to inform the House in advance.

Penny Mordaunt

We continue to develop the ability of our Armed Forces to deploy a broad range of offensive cyber capabilities as an integrated part of military operations. As with other sensitive defence capabilities, we do not reveal specific details in order to safeguard national security. As we have previously made clear in the context of the war powers convention, we do not propose to define the circumstances in which we would consult Parliament about the use of particular military capabilities.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-04-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether the Government has (a) sought and (b) received permission for the use of (i) Italian or (ii) US facilities at Sigonella by RAF aircraft for operations in Libyan airspace.

Mr Tobias Ellwood

We have had a long-standing presence at Naval Air Station Sigonella, and have made frequent use of it. However, it is not normal practice to comment on the details of arrangements with host nations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-04-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many and what proportion of Syrian opposition groups which the Joint Intelligence Committee has identified as non-extremist are currently represented in the UN-led peace negotiations in Geneva.

Mr Tobias Ellwood

There are currently four representatives of Armed Opposition Groups in the seventeen member negotiating team of the opposition’s High Negotiations Committee in Geneva, including Mohammed Alloush (representing one of the armed groups), who is the Chief Negotiator.