Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the use of gas by Russia in Ukraine; and whether he plans to supply respirators to Ukraine.
Answered by Luke Pollard - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
The Ministry of Defence continues to assess and monitor the evolving threat picture in Ukraine, including Russian use of chemicals as a method of warfare. The UK has been at the forefront of international support and assistance to the armed forces of Ukraine and has provided respirators and decontamination kits, as well as other protective measures to enhance Ukraine's protective capabilities against chemical weapons.
Our commitment to Ukraine is unwavering, we continue to work closely with our international partners to coordinate counter-CBRN support and assistance to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of reports of the outsourcing by a commercial subcontractor of work to coders based in Belarus; what remedial steps he has taken; whether he has made changes to his Department's procedures; and whether sanctions have been imposed.
Answered by Maria Eagle - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)
Both the Ministry of Defence (MOD) and Rolls-Royce Submarines (RRS) investigated a subcontractor's outsourcing of development work for a RRS intranet page; this IT system is separate to the RRS classified systems. The investigation found no evidence that Belarusian nationals had access to sensitive information and concluded that no change to MOD procurement policy was required. No formal sanctions were imposed.
Defence took steps to ensure and confirm that there had been no compromise of classified information. The safety and security of the United Kingdom's nuclear submarines and the Deterrent, including the Service personnel who operate it, remain our highest priority. Our security processes are under constant review to ensure best practice.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his oral reply of 19 February 2024 to the Rt hon Member for New Forest East on HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, Official Report, column 458,, whether his assurance that one of those ships will always be being made ready to sail means that neither will be mothballed.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Shadow Secretary of State for Defence
I can confirm that neither HMS ALBION nor HMS BULWARK will be scrapped or mothballed before their planned out of service dates in 2033 and 2034 respectively. As has been the case since 2010, one Landing Platform Dock ship will be held in extended readiness such that she will be capable of being regenerated if we have strategic notice that she will be needed.
As such, HMS ALBION will take HMS BULWARK's place in extended readiness. While you would not expect me to reveal the fine detail of readiness forecasts for security reasons, I can confirm HMS BULWARK will be regenerated from extended readiness and maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what his Department’s policy is on the construction of a national flagship; and whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of using private sponsorship to finance the construction of such a vessel.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Shadow Secretary of State for Defence
In the face of Russia’s illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, the decision was made to suspend the National Flagship programme in order to accelerate the procurement of the Multi Role Ocean Surveillance ships.
The Government has no current aspiration to revive the National Flagship. However, the National Shipbuilding Office stands ready to engage with any privately funded venture which has a developed business case and that would bring benefit to UK shipyards and broader supply chain.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how much of the £87,500 lump-sum payment will war widows who have remarried or started cohabiting receive after taxation; and if he will make it his policy to either make the payments tax-exempt or increase the level of the payments so that each recipient receives £87,500 after tax.
Answered by Andrew Murrison
There is nothing we can do to bring a loved one back, and no amount of money will ever change that. This payment is not intended to put a value on a widow’s loss. But this is a meaningful amount in recognition that remarriage or cohabiting with a new partner does not erase the bereavement.
The rules for this recognition payment include that it is taxable. This was taken into consideration when the figure was set at £87,500. The amount received after taxation will depend on individual circumstances.
Ministry of Defence and Treasury officials are working on the details and rollout.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the UK Armed Forces Families Strategy 2022 to 2032, published on 19 January 2022, what steps his Department is taking to negotiate permission for the spouses or partners of service personnel to be able to work when accompanying personnel on deployment overseas; if he will make an assessment of the impact of negotiating those permissions on levels of early resignation from the armed forces by affected personnel; whether he has had recent discussions with the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs on the experience of that Department of negotiating those permissions for the families of diplomats posted abroad; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Andrew Murrison
Armed Forces families are at the heart of the Defence community and the UK Armed Forces Families Strategy 2022 to 2032 acknowledged the importance of making their recognition and care a priority. The Strategy seeks to offer choice and flexibility in allowing personnel to serve and raise a family simultaneously, with benefit to all. In developing the Strategy, we were guided by the evidence of families to focus our attention on their key areas of concern; one such was enabling a partner to manage their career alongside the service person.
Officials from the Ministry of Defence have had initial conversations with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office on the subject of spousal employment. However, the parallel between Armed Forces families and those of diplomats is not a direct one. The legal position of our Armed Forces and their families overseas is determined by local agreements or memoranda, and thus differs from diplomatic staff.
Overseas assignments present families with diverse and unique experiences, but the support available can vary, depending on the host nation and the specific assignment. As part of the Armed Forces Families Strategy, we are working to help inform those families of the support that is available to them prior to their departure overseas to ensure that they are able to make well-informed decisions.
In the Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS), spouse/partner career is often cited as one of the top three factors influencing intentions to leave, although this is not an issue uniquely linked to overseas deployments. This question in AFCAS measures intentions, rather than actual behaviours, so this does not necessarily mean that availability of spousal employment leads to early resignation.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 23 February 2023 to Question 148519 on Nuclear Test Veterans, whether the results of blood tests on personnel who witnessed nuclear test events (a) are held at the Atomic Weapons Establishment and (b) will be made available on request to the (i) veterans and (ii) surviving members of the families of deceased veterans; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Andrew Murrison
The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) do not hold the blood test results for Nuclear Test Veterans. AWE holds a small number of references to blood and urine tests which were included in scientific documentation related to nuclear weapons trials. Veterans or members of their family are entitled to request information that may be held by AWE through Subject Access Requests, which will be handled in a routine manner.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when his Department expects to announce dates for nuclear test veterans to receive the medals and clasps in recognition of their service; and what steps his Department is taking to make available to interested parties the findings of medical tests carried out on participants in the nuclear testing programme.
Answered by Andrew Murrison
The Government continues to recognise and be grateful to all Service personnel who participated in the British Nuclear testing programme. They contributed to keeping our nation secure during the Cold War and since, by ensuring that the UK was equipped with an appropriate nuclear capability.
I am pleased that a forthcoming commemorative Nuclear Test Medal was announced by the Prime Minister in November 2022, which is intended to recognise Service veterans and civilians who participated in the UK’s nuclear tests between 1952 and 1967. The first Nuclear Test Medals are expected to be available in summer 2023. Details on the eligibility criteria for the Medal, together with information on the application process, will be announced by the end of March 2023. There is a long-established process to design, procure and produce a new Medal and collectively this process takes some months.
In relation to medical test results, an individual can make a Subject Access Request (SAR) to the relevant military service, Veterans UK or the Atomic Weapons Establishment to have sight of what records are held on them. Information is provided on request to individuals, or representatives acting on their behalf, under ‘General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Chapter 3, Article 15 – Right of access’.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what further steps he plans to take to assist Ukraine to neutralise the use of long-range artillery against civil and military targets by Russian armed forces; whether equipment, supplied to Ukraine by the UK for this purpose, will include unmanned aerial vehicles and other smart munitions; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by James Heappey
The UK has already committed £1.3 billion for military operations and has provided lethal aid that has assisted the Ukrainians to defend itself and its sovereignty. This military aid includes counter-battery radar and a range of unmanned aerial systems. We have recently announced, that we will be providing multiple launch rocket systems which will provide Ukraine with a significant boost in capability. Ministers have kept the House updated regularly on the situation in Ukraine and will continue to do so.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department continues to apply the criteria introduced following the 2016 publication of the Defence Committee report (HC567) calling for restrictions on the prescribing of the antimalarial drug Lariam (Mefloquine) to Service personnel; if he will arrange for a consolidated table to be published of the twice-yearly data, subsequently compiled, showing the (a) number of individuals prescribed Lariam in each six-month period since such data began to be released, (b) percentages of those individuals prescribed Lariam who (i) did and (ii) did not receive face-to-face assessments, prior to the issuing of the prescriptions during each six-month period, and (c) totals of other antimalarials prescribed to Service personnel during each six-month period; whether it is his policy that the use of Lariam on a scale greater than that since 2016 should be permitted in future; and whether he accepts the original recommendation by the Defence Committee that Lariam should be designated as a drug of last resort, to be prescribed to Service personnel only (A) if an individual is unable to tolerate any of the available alternatives; (B) after a face-to-face individual risk assessment; and (C) after he or she has been made aware of the available alternatives and given the choice between such alternatives and Lariam; and whether his Department has an evidential basis for challenging evidence of serious side effects previously caused to some Service personnel when Lariam was widely dispensed within the Armed Forces.
Answered by Leo Docherty
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) revised its malaria prevention policy in response to the Defence Select Committee Inquiry. As a result, it remains the policy that mefloquine only be prescribed to Service personnel by a doctor, after a face-to-face malaria health risk assessment and alternatives to mefloquine have been identified as unsuitable. There are no plans for this policy to change in the future.
The Government publishes official statistics every six months on Mefloquine Prescribing in UK Armed Forces. All future official statistics will include the supplementary table requested.
It is admitted, on the balance of probabilities, that as a prophylactic mefloquine can cause a range of minor to moderate psychiatric symptoms in certain individuals for a limited period of time. The causal relation between mefloquine and severe or long-term symptoms has not been shown. Whether it has caused any symptoms in individual cases will be a matter for expert evidence.
The issue of longer-term sequelae is currently being litigated and the MOD has the support of eminent experts in the fields of psychiatry, neuro-psychiatry, epidemiology, neurotoxicology and psychopharmacology whose evidence is privileged and will be disclosed in due course within the litigation. Their evidence is consistent in its conclusion that there is insufficient evidence to establish a link between taking mefloquine and long-term psychiatric illness or neurological damage.