Tag: Kevan Jones

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page eight, when Ministers in his Department first established that reserves cost around 87 per cent of the cost of regulars when mobilised.

Anna Soubry

The figures used by the NAO in paragraph 11 of their report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, were taken from Future Reserves 2020: The Independent Commission to Review the United Kingdom’s Reserve Forces. I refer the hon. Member to paragraph 97. This involved considerable work to develop a Regular: Reserve Cost Comparison Model.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page eight, if he will provide a breakdown of the costings used to work out that reserves cost around 87 per cent of the costs of regulars when mobilised.

Anna Soubry

The figures used by the NAO in paragraph 11 of their report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, were taken from Future Reserves 2020: The Independent Commission to Review the United Kingdom’s Reserve Forces. I refer the hon. Member to paragraph 97. This involved considerable work to develop a Regular: Reserve Cost Comparison Model.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page 30, if he will provide a breakdown of the extra £70 million in costs that will be borne by his Department for the decision to revert to a hosting environment provided by Capita as part of the Recruiting Partnering Project.

Anna Soubry

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Philip Hammond) set out on 14 January 2014 (Official Report, column 716) the cost of Capita providing a new Information Technology platform as part of the Recruiting Partnering Project. At the time, these costs were expected to be around £47.7 million directly linked to the change of hosting provision. Since this statement, the £47.7 million has reduced to £42.9 million.

As previously stated by the Secretary of State on 14 January, there has been an additional cost of around £1 million per month to run the Capita system. This includes costs for additional manpower.

The Recruiting Partnering Project remains within the overall agreed cost of £1.360 billion.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page 25, if he will provide details of (a) the 167 implementation orders that his Department has already issued as part of the Army 2020 reforms and (b) any implementation orders which have yet to be issued.

Mr Mark Francois

Implementation Orders are used to communicate structural changes within the Army. As at June 2014 over 170 orders have been issued for Army 2020. The Ministry of Defence does not routinely publish details of internal military orders.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department will issue a formal response to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014.

Mr Mark Francois

The Ministry of Defence will respond to the NAO’s report in line with Government practice for such reports.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will provide details of the current workforce model for the Army Reserve that his Department is using to assess how long it will take to recruit the required number of 30,000 reserves; and when under the current model that target will be met.

Anna Soubry

I refer the hon. Member to the Written Statement and paper my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Philip Hammond) placed in the Library of the House on 19 Dec 2013 (Official report, column 124WS).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what planning data was used to devise his Department’s recruitment target for the Army Reserve as part of its Army 2020 reforms.

Anna Soubry

The term “recruitment target” has been interpreted as the 30,000 trained Army Reservists required under Army 2020.

During the Three Month Exercise, the Ministry Of Defence examined a range of Force Structure options which were assessed as being able to deliver the policy demand specified by the new Defence Planning Assumptions laid out in Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010. As a result of this, a Senior Military Judgement Panel chaired by the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff and including the Assistant Chiefs of the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force concluded that the size of the Regular Army should be 82,500, and the Independent Commission to Review the United Kingdom’s Reserve Forces recommended an Army Reserve of 30,000 trained personnel. This was judged to be the optimal size and shape of the Army within available resources.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what preliminary tests his Department conducted to assess whether it was feasible to recruit and train the required number of reserves within the necessary timescale envisaged by the Army 2020 proposals.

Anna Soubry

Following the Strategic Defence and Security Review, a three month exercise was undertaken which examined a range of force structure options which built upon analysis undertaken during the review. These options were then tested for their efficacy against a wide range of scenarios. The options were then assessed by a senior judgement panel, chaired by the Vice Chief of Defence Staff. Included in this panel were the Assistant Chiefs of Staff for the Royal Navy, Army and royal Air Force. The panel took decisions collectively and all members were fully involved and consulted.

In July 2011 an Independent Commission to Review the UK’s Reserve Forces, chaired by my hon. Friend, the member for Canterbury and Whitstable (Julian Brazier) and General Sir Nicholas Houghton, then set a target of 30,000 for a trained Army Reserve. This judgement was reached in the knowledge that the strength of the Territorial Army had been over 70,000 in the 1980s.

Subsequent work was then undertaken to establish the timescales to build the trained strength of the Army Reserve to 30,000. This was set out in the Written Ministerial Statement and paper placed in the Library of the House by my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Defence (Philip Hammond) on 19 December 2013 (Official Report, column 124WS).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page 12, what his Department’s response is to the recommendation that it should reassess its targets for recruiting reserves.

Anna Soubry

I refer the hon. Member to the Written Ministerial Statement and paper my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Philip Hammond) placed in the Library of the House on 19 December 2013 (Official report, column 124WS). The hon. Member will be aware that this is a five-year plan and I am confident that the Army will reach this target.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page 17, if he will provide details of the eight options for force structures that his Department considered in 2011, and his Department’s estimate of the savings each would have accrued.

Mr Mark Francois

I am not able to provide the information requested, since to do so could adversely affect the formulation of future defence policy.