Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what support they are offering each of the Crown Dependencies in building cyber-resilience, broken down by dependency.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The Government is committed to supporting the Crown Dependencies in deterring and defending against state and non-state threats. Since its creation in 2016, the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has supported the Crown Dependencies in building their cyber resilience. The NCSC supports the governments, police and communications service providers of the Crown Dependencies, engaging with them on a regular basis to provide expert advice, guidance, the latest threat assessments and support related to incidents affecting their networks. The governments of the Crown Dependencies also use a range of Active Cyber Defence tools and services provided by the NCSC.
Although a breakdown of costs is not available, examples of support includes:
The NCSC supported and advised on the formation of Cyber Security Incident Response Teams in the Crown Dependencies. Jersey Cyber Emergency Response Team (CERT) has now been established and is responsible for promoting and improving the cyber resilience across the Island’s critical national infrastructure.
The NCSC have attended events on each of the Crown Dependencies in recent years, presenting at the Isle of Man’s Cyber Isle cyber Conference in 2021, 2022 and 2023. Attendees were informed about the NCSC’s free products and services available to all Crown Dependencies covering public, private and third sectors;
The Governments of the Crown Dependencies, are eligible for and are using NCSC Active Cyber Defence services including Mail Check, Web Check, Early Warning and Protective DNS. These are the same tools used by HMG to help protect our networks.
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Goldie on 13 April (HL6933), what assessment they have made of the decision by the Prime Minister on 21 November 2022 to overrule the Cabinet Office Advisory Military Sub Committee's decision not to award medallic recognition to UK Nuclear Test Veterans.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The Advisory Military Sub-Committee (AMSC) adheres to the same principles and rules for defining risk and rigour as set out in the independent Military Medals Review (2012). As per paragraph 12 of the review ‘the idea is that campaign medals should only be awarded where deployed personnel have been exposed to a significant degree of risk to life and limb, and to arduous conditions, in excess of what might be expected as part of normal service duties, whether deployed or in the home base’. There will always be a subjective element of judgement involved when determining what constitutes appropriate risk and rigour, on a case by case basis[1].
The AMSC’s recommendation on the case for retrospective medallic recognition for all those who participated in the British Nuclear Test Programme 1952 - 1991 was not to award a military service medal. This followed the AMSC’s assessment of the evidence provided against the longstanding framework for military medallic recognition. The HD Committee reviewed the conclusions reached by the AMSC and was in agreement that this programme does not meet the criteria of risk and rigour required for a military service medal.
However, despite the decision not to award a military medal, and after considering inputs from other stakeholders, the HD Committee felt that there was a case for alternative recognition outside the remit of AMSC. The service given by the nuclear test veterans - both military and civilian - was significant in providing the UK’s nuclear deterrent during the critical early years of the Cold War.
The HD Committee agreed that an official commemorative medal, which recognised both military and civilian contributors to the nuclear tests, would be most appropriate. This commemorative medal was approved by His Majesty The King.
[1] The full report can be found on GOV.UK: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61398/Medals-Interim-Report-July-12.pdf
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Goldie on 13 April (HL6933), what are the official definitions of 'risk' and 'rigour' as used by the Cabinet Office’s Advisory Military Sub Committee.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The Advisory Military Sub-Committee (AMSC) adheres to the same principles and rules for defining risk and rigour as set out in the independent Military Medals Review (2012). As per paragraph 12 of the review ‘the idea is that campaign medals should only be awarded where deployed personnel have been exposed to a significant degree of risk to life and limb, and to arduous conditions, in excess of what might be expected as part of normal service duties, whether deployed or in the home base’. There will always be a subjective element of judgement involved when determining what constitutes appropriate risk and rigour, on a case by case basis[1].
The AMSC’s recommendation on the case for retrospective medallic recognition for all those who participated in the British Nuclear Test Programme 1952 - 1991 was not to award a military service medal. This followed the AMSC’s assessment of the evidence provided against the longstanding framework for military medallic recognition. The HD Committee reviewed the conclusions reached by the AMSC and was in agreement that this programme does not meet the criteria of risk and rigour required for a military service medal.
However, despite the decision not to award a military medal, and after considering inputs from other stakeholders, the HD Committee felt that there was a case for alternative recognition outside the remit of AMSC. The service given by the nuclear test veterans - both military and civilian - was significant in providing the UK’s nuclear deterrent during the critical early years of the Cold War.
The HD Committee agreed that an official commemorative medal, which recognised both military and civilian contributors to the nuclear tests, would be most appropriate. This commemorative medal was approved by His Majesty The King.
[1] The full report can be found on GOV.UK: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61398/Medals-Interim-Report-July-12.pdf