Tag: Kevan Jones

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.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons his Department did not provide supporting ICT infrastructure for Capita’s new recruitment software as required under its contractual arrangements with Capita in relation to the Recruiting Partnering Project.

Anna Soubry

A number of factors contributed to the problems experienced with the Information Communication Technology hosting environment provided for Capita.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Philip Hammond) on 14 January 2014 (Official Report, column 715) to the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker).

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 10, which Minister in his Department signed off on the decision not to provide supporting ICT infrastructure for Capita’s new recruitment software as part of his Department’s contractual arrangements with Capita in relation to the Recruiting Partnering Project.

Anna Soubry

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 21 January 2014 (Official Report, column 111W).

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 five, if he will provide a breakdown of the £5.3 billion savings that reductions in the army would save from 2012-13 to 2021-22.

Mr Mark Francois

The vast majority – approximately 85% – of the savings referred to in the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, are the direct result of the reduction in the size of the Regular Army from 94,000 to 82,500.

The remaining savings arise from associated cost reductions, such as the reduced requirement for civilian support.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps his Department is taking to rectify the (a) inconsistent understanding of Army staffing requirements, (b) limited use of management information and (c) unsystematic approach to improvement in relation to the Recruiting Partnering Project referred to on pages 36 and 37 of the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014.

Anna Soubry

The National Audit Office made a number of observations and recommendations in their report into Army 2020. The Department will respond to these in due course. Part of the reason the Army has entered a recruitment partnership with Capita is to harness the benefits of an integrated recruiting system to help the Army drive more effective end to end recruiting and training activity. As the Capita IT systems and applications and the Recruitment Partnering Project reaches Full Operating Capability, and can interact with other IT tools available to the Army, we would expect to see these benefits realised.

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.