1-20 of 69 results for subject:Afghanistan
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.261 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.006 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Afghanistan
- We searched for
- subject_t:Afghanistan OR subject_ses:8255
Answering member
X
Lord Davies of Stamford
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Davies of Stamford, Lord (69)
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 8 March 2010, Official Report, column 19W, on Afghanistan: peacekeeping operations, what the average cost of (a) aviation and (b) vehicle fuel was (i) per litre and (ii) per imperial gallon in each such year.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 8 March 2010, Official Report, column 19W, on Afghanistan: peacekeeping operations, what the average cost of (a) aviation and (b) vehicle fuel was (i) per litre and (ii) per imperial gallon in each such year.
Asked by
Ann Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
10 March 2010
For answer on
12 March 2010
Answered on
7 April 2010
The average monthly price of fuel for operations in Afghanistan is:
We purchase fuel in litres and keep records only on this basis. The costs per litre prior to May 2008 are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
| Aviation fuel per litre (£) | Vehicle fuel per litre (£) | |
| Period | ||
| April 2009 - end January 2010 | 1.325 | 1.25 |
| May 2008 - March 2009 | 1.46 | 1.38 |
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
7 April 2010
Reference
508 c1364-5W; 322182
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which items of equipment procured since 2001 and made available to operations in Afghanistan were procured as part of his Department's core equipment programme.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which items of equipment procured since 2001 and made available to operations in Afghanistan were procured as part of his Department's core equipment programme.
Asked by
Nick Harvey
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
15 March 2010
For answer on
17 March 2010
Answered on
6 April 2010
The following table, which is based on centrally held records, lists the majority of equipment projects with a cost of £20 million or over that were procured from the core equipment programme since 2004 and made available to operations in Afghanistan. A number of equipment projects have not been included as their disclosure would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.Details of equipment projects procured prior to 2004, and projects costing less than £20 million for the entire period covered by the question, are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Other equipment projects are planned to be procured from the core equipment programme to be made available for operations in Afghanistan. These include land equipment, information systems and services and helicopter projects and the 7th C17. Many other equipment projects procured from the core equipment programme have delivered capability in support of other operations.
| Category | Equipment |
| Land Equipment | Battle Group Thermal Imaging |
| Trojan | |
| Panther Command and Liaison Vehicle (CLV)¹ | |
| Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System | |
| Future Fire Control System | |
| Wheeled Tankers | |
| Pinzgauer 4x4 Truck Utility Medium Fitted For Radio | |
| Dismounted Counter Mine Capability—Vallon handheld mine detector | |
| Support Vehicle (SV) | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Crane Terex 35 Tonne | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Light Wheel Tractor All Arms JCB 3CX | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Light Wheeled Tractor JCB 4CX | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Medium Wheeled Tractor | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Bulldozer Cat D5N | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Heavy Well Drills | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Rough Terrain Forklift 2400 kg JCB | |
| C Vehicle PFI—Rough terrain Forklift 4000 kg JCB | |
| Operational Field Catering System (OFCS) | |
| Mobile Artillery Monitoring Battlefield Radar | |
| Weapons | Light Forces Anti-Tank Guided Weapon |
| Javelin Follow-On Buy | |
| Air Support | C-17 (5th Aircraft) |
| C-17 (6th aircraft) | |
| Information Systems and Services | Bowman |
| UIC/TSC503 Transportable SATCOM Terminals | |
| Helicopters | Chinook Coherence |
| ¹ The Panther CLV was procured through the core equipment programme but a number of the vehicles underwent a modification, funded as an urgent operational requirement, to enable them to operate in Afghanistan. |
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
6 April 2010
Reference
508 c1194-5W; 322846
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what role the Scout vehicles will carry out in Afghanistan; and what the cost of each such vehicle will be on deployment in theatre.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what role the Scout vehicles will carry out in Afghanistan; and what the cost of each such vehicle will be on deployment in theatre.
Asked by
Ann Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
29 March 2010
For answer on
6 April 2010
Answered on
6 April 2010
The Scout vehicles will be the principal reconnaissance vehicles of the British Army and will replace Scimitar vehicles which are currently deployed in Afghanistan. The final numbers and costs will be determined at the manufacture investment decision point.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
6 April 2010
Reference
508 c1195W; 325452
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what main weapons systems Scout vehicles will have on deployment in Afghanistan; which companies are the (a) manufacturers and (b) suppliers of the ammunition for the vehicle's main weapons systems; what the cost is per round of ammunition; and what estimate he...
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what main weapons systems Scout vehicles will have on deployment in Afghanistan; which companies are the (a) manufacturers and (b) suppliers of the ammunition for the vehicle's main weapons systems; what the cost is per round of ammunition; and what estimate he...
Asked by
Ann Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
29 March 2010
For answer on
6 April 2010
Answered on
6 April 2010
The intent is for the Scout vehicle's main weapon system to be the 40 mm Cased Telescoped Cannon provided by Cased Telescoped Ammunition International, a joint private venture between BAES and Nexter. On current plans, BAES will produce the ammunition for the cannon at their facilities in Glascoed, South Wales under the Department's Munitions Acquisition Supply Solution (MASS) contract. The cost of each round of ammunition will be determined during commercial negotiations before the MASS contract is amended to incorporate the 40 mm ammunition. The lifespan of the barrel will be established during the qualification programme for the cannon and ammunition. The qualification programme consists of an extensive series of tests and trials to ensure that the cannon and ammunition are safe, reliable and effective for use by the British Army.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
6 April 2010
Reference
508 c1195W; 325453
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much (a) aviation and (b) vehicle fuel for British forces in Afghanistan cost in each of the last five years.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much (a) aviation and (b) vehicle fuel for British forces in Afghanistan cost in each of the last five years.
Asked by
Ann Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
25 February 2010
For answer on
1 March 2010
Answered on
8 March 2010
The following table sets out the ground fuel and aviation fuel costs for Afghanistan for financial years (FYs) 2005-06 through to 2009-10, up to the end of January 2010.
| £ million | ||
| Financial year | Ground fuel | Aviation fuel |
| 2009-10 (end January 2010) | 41.122 | 61.639 |
| 2008-09 | 48.890 | 66.317 |
| 2007-08 | 40.182 | 2.671 |
| 2006-07 | 5.447 | 2.866 |
| 2005-06 | 1.180 | 0.436 |
| Total | 136.821 | 133.929 |
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
8 March 2010
Reference
507 c19W; 319848
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department (a) has and (b) has had contracts with Watan Risk Management in Afghanistan.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department (a) has and (b) has had contracts with Watan Risk Management in Afghanistan.
Asked by
Colin Breed
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
13 January 2010
For answer on
18 January 2010
Answered on
20 January 2010
The Department does not have and has not had contracts with Watan Risk Management in Afghanistan.
Subjects
Contracts; Afghanistan; Watan Risk Management
Date
20 January 2010
Reference
504 c352W; 311424
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether new equipment and vehicles being introduced for use in Afghanistan are available for pre-deployment training.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether new equipment and vehicles being introduced for use in Afghanistan are available for pre-deployment training.
Asked by
Robert Goodwill
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
5 January 2010
For answer on
11 January 2010
Answered on
11 January 2010
There is always a difficult balance to strike when we provide new equipment and vehicles for operations in Afghanistan. We want to allow our deployed forces to take advantage of the latest equipment as soon as possible. On the other hand, they must be thoroughly trained on the equipment they use before they face the enemy.We endeavour to deploy complete equipment capability, which is a combination of trained manpower and sustainable equipment. To do this, often the first delivery of a new items of equipment is required for training to ensure the best effect is achieved from the new capability once deployed. That said, there can be occasions, particularly with less complex equipments, when it makes sense to strike a different balance and train in theatre.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c738-9W; 309580
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the first Chinook reverted from HC3 to HC2 will be deployed to Afghanistan.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the first Chinook reverted from HC3 to HC2 will be deployed to Afghanistan.
Asked by
Angus Robertson
(Scottish National Party)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
15 December 2009
For answer on
5 January 2010
Answered on
11 January 2010
The first of eight Chinook HC3 aircraft, reverted to HC2 Support Helicopter standard, was delivered for training purposes in November 2009, and is therefore already fulfilling tasking commitments as part of the wider Chinook fleet. A second Chinook is scheduled for delivery shortly, when it will also be available for training purposes. The remaining six aircraft will be delivered during the course of 2010 and delivery is expected to be complete by the end of the year. This will allow us to deploy more Chinooks to Afghanistan in the course of 2010.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c742W; 308612
House
House of Commons
The suggestion of a lack of co-operation with our American allies, like the suggestion of the withholding of funds, is utter rubbish, complete nonsense, totally libellous and without the slightest foundation in fact. I hope that the hon. Gentleman takes those words on board. In fact, we have very close co-operation with the United States on counter-IED measures and force protection. Indeed, we use the same methods, based on various air vehicles, which have been very successful and which I have seen for myself in real time in theatre.
The suggestion of a lack of co-operation with our American allies, like the suggestion of the withholding of funds, is utter rubbish, complete nonsense, totally libellous and without the slightest foundation in fact. I hope that the hon. Gentleman takes those words on board. In fact, we have very close co-operation with the United States on counter-IED measures and force protection. Indeed, we use the same methods, based on various air vehicles, which have been very successful and which I have seen for myself in real time in theatre.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Asked by
Andrew Murrison
(Conservative)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Oral answers to questions
I am grateful to the veterans Minister, the Under-Secretary of State for Defence, the hon. Member for North Durham (Mr. Jones), for our meeting before Christmas to discuss body armour. I know that he appreciates—presumably his colleague does as well—the capabilities and limitations of body armour. The United States increasingly relies on aerial reconnaissance to detect improvised explosive devices, which, despite personal protective kit, kill more soldiers than anything else in Afghanistan. Is the different approach to force protection down to the Minister's failure to get the US to share technology or the withholding of funds for equipment, which was discussed over the weekend in connection with the then Defence Secretary, Chancellor and Prime Minister?
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c396-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Osprey armour, which we began to issue to our troops in 2006, is second to none in the world. We are now in the process of issuing a new version that is more comfortable but equally protected—Osprey Assault—together with the mark 7 helmet, to all those who are liable to deploy outside the wire in Afghanistan. That is another example of the concept of a continuous pipeline of improvement in the equipment provided to our forces in Afghanistan in operation.
The Osprey armour, which we began to issue to our troops in 2006, is second to none in the world. We are now in the process of issuing a new version that is more comfortable but equally protected—Osprey Assault—together with the mark 7 helmet, to all those who are liable to deploy outside the wire in Afghanistan. That is another example of the concept of a continuous pipeline of improvement in the equipment provided to our forces in Afghanistan in operation.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Stunell
(Liberal Democrat)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Oral answers to questions
What his most recent assessment is of the adequacy of provision of body armour to UK front-line forces serving in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c395
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
My hon. Friend, who is an expert in this field and a distinguished member of the Select Committee on Defence, has got it absolutely right. There are always trade-offs in such matters. Quite simply, no human being could carry the weight that would be required to provide ballistic protection all over the body. That is a physical impossibility, and we will just have to face it. There are already trade-offs made, in circumstances where troops are carrying electronic counter-measures and communications equipment. They might be carrying 60 kg or even 70 kg each, often in appalling weather conditions, with temperatures in the 40s, and so on. There are genuine limits, and we are looking all the time at how we can provide the essential equipment as lightly as possible, consistent with the best possible outcomes.
My hon. Friend, who is an expert in this field and a distinguished member of the Select Committee on Defence, has got it absolutely right. There are always trade-offs in such matters. Quite simply, no human being could carry the weight that would be required to provide ballistic protection all over the body. That is a physical impossibility, and we will just have to face it. There are already trade-offs made, in circumstances where troops are carrying electronic counter-measures and communications equipment. They might be carrying 60 kg or even 70 kg each, often in appalling weather conditions, with temperatures in the 40s, and so on. There are genuine limits, and we are looking all the time at how we can provide the essential equipment as lightly as possible, consistent with the best possible outcomes.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Asked by
David S Borrow
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Oral answers to questions
Does my hon. Friend agree that although we can design body armour that gives more protection, there is a risk that it will be heavier and more difficult to move about in? There is a tension between the amount of protection that can be given and the mobility of our soldiers in the field. If we are not careful, there is a danger that some soldiers will not wear all their body armour in order to get more mobility.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c396
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
We are all bitterly sorry about the death of the hon. Gentleman's constituent, and about that of every other man and woman who has fallen for the country in the difficult conflict in Afghanistan. However, my answer to him and to the House is clear: we provide, and will continue to provide, the very best equipment that we can—the very best armour, the very best weapons, the very best communications equipment, the very best vehicles, the very best helicopters and the very best of everything else. We regard that as a sacred task.
We are all bitterly sorry about the death of the hon. Gentleman's constituent, and about that of every other man and woman who has fallen for the country in the difficult conflict in Afghanistan. However, my answer to him and to the House is clear: we provide, and will continue to provide, the very best equipment that we can—the very best armour, the very best weapons, the very best communications equipment, the very best vehicles, the very best helicopters and the very best of everything else. We regard that as a sacred task.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Stunell
(Liberal Democrat)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Oral answers to questions
When my constituent Marine Corporal Danny Winter died in action, he was the first casualty from Stockport for 30 years. That has much increased local concern about whether we have the right equipment in the right place and at the right time. Will the Minister say clearly to the House when he believes that we shall have good force protection equipment in place and avoid the casualties and the terrible injuries that are now occurring?
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c396
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
What his most recent assessment is of the adequacy of provision of body armour to UK front-line forces serving in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement.
What his most recent assessment is of the adequacy of provision of body armour to UK front-line forces serving in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement.
Asked by
Lord Stunell
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Tabled on
5 January 2010
For answer on
11 January 2010
Answered on
11 January 2010
The Osprey armour, which we began to issue to our troops in 2006, is second to none in the world. We are now in the process of issuing a new version that is more comfortable but equally protected—Osprey Assault—together with the mark 7 helmet, to all those who are liable to deploy outside the wire in Afghanistan. That is another example of the concept of a continuous pipeline of improvement in the equipment provided to our forces in Afghanistan in operation.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c395; 309567
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
We have already begun to deploy them. The first Merlin arrived before Christmas, and Merlins are in the process of being deployed there. Over the next few months, we will deploy not only more Merlins, but more Chinooks and the re-engined Lynxes, which can fly 365 days a year. As I said earlier, between July last year and July this year, there is to be a 50 per cent. increase in the number of helicopters in Afghanistan, and an even greater increase in available flying hours.
We have already begun to deploy them. The first Merlin arrived before Christmas, and Merlins are in the process of being deployed there. Over the next few months, we will deploy not only more Merlins, but more Chinooks and the re-engined Lynxes, which can fly 365 days a year. As I said earlier, between July last year and July this year, there is to be a 50 per cent. increase in the number of helicopters in Afghanistan, and an even greater increase in available flying hours.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Afghanistan; Reconstruction
Date
11 January 2010
Reference
503 c409 (504 3-4mc)
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many TALON bomb disposal robots the Army has in Afghanistan.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many TALON bomb disposal robots the Army has in Afghanistan.
Asked by
Angus Robertson
(Scottish National Party)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
15 December 2009
For answer on
5 January 2010
Answered on
6 January 2010
TALON is not yet deployed, but when it is deployed in the next few weeks it will be used in a route clearing role in support of Counter-Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED) operations. For reasons of operational security, I am unable to reveal how many of these pieces of equipment will be available. However, I can give an assurance that sufficient numbers will be available for operational purposes in theatre, and for pre-deployment training in the UK.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
6 January 2010
Reference
503 c436W; 308628
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many handheld bomb detectors the Army has in Afghanistan.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many handheld bomb detectors the Army has in Afghanistan.
Asked by
Angus Robertson
(Scottish National Party)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
15 December 2009
For answer on
5 January 2010
Answered on
6 January 2010
For reasons of operational security, I am unable to reveal how many handheld metal detectors the Army has in Afghanistan. However, I can give an assurance that the numbers available are sufficient to ensure that no foot patrol is conducted in theatre without them. We will continue to deliver new equipment to theatre, including handheld metal detectors, as quickly as possible.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
6 January 2010
Reference
503 c436W; 308632
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how much his Department paid for Jet A1 and diesel fuel delivered to Camp Bastion in support of UK operations in the last 12 month period for which figures are available;
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how much his Department paid for Jet A1 and diesel fuel delivered to Camp Bastion in support of UK operations in the last 12 month period for which figures are available;
Asked by
Adam Holloway
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
2 December 2009
For answer on
7 December 2009
Answered on
9 December 2009
[holding answer 7 December 2009]: Fuel for both Bastion and Kandahar Airbase is paid for from the same budget. During the last 12 calendar months £85,669,000 was paid for aviation fuel; and £43,058,000 for ground fuel for both locations. Based upon information from FY 2008-09 onwards the average monthly cost of aviation fuel was £6,070,000; and £2,891,000 for ground fuel for both Bastion and Kandahar Airbase. The information for fuel costs prior to FY 2008-09 is not held centrally.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
9 December 2009
Reference
502 c362W; 304745
House
House of Commons
(2) what the average monthly cost to his Department was of Jet A1 and diesel fuel delivered to Camp Bastion in support of UK operations since 2005.
(2) what the average monthly cost to his Department was of Jet A1 and diesel fuel delivered to Camp Bastion in support of UK operations since 2005.
Asked by
Adam Holloway
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
2 December 2009
For answer on
7 December 2009
Answered on
9 December 2009
[holding answer 7 December 2009]: Fuel for both Bastion and Kandahar Airbase is paid for from the same budget. During the last 12 calendar months £85,669,000 was paid for aviation fuel; and £43,058,000 for ground fuel for both locations. Based upon information from FY 2008-09 onwards the average monthly cost of aviation fuel was £6,070,000; and £2,891,000 for ground fuel for both Bastion and Kandahar Airbase. The information for fuel costs prior to FY 2008-09 is not held centrally.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
9 December 2009
Reference
502 c362W; 304746
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will introduce groin protection plates as an addition to personal body armour for armed forces personnel deployed in Helmand province.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will introduce groin protection plates as an addition to personal body armour for armed forces personnel deployed in Helmand province.
Asked by
Tobias Ellwood
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
2 December 2009
For answer on
7 December 2009
Answered on
8 December 2009
We are continually seeking ways to further protect our personnel, and work is well under way to research ways of providing additional protection including for the whole of the perineal area.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
8 December 2009
Reference
502 c201-2W; 304727
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many night vision goggles have been (a) lost and (b) stolen in Afghanistan in each year since 2001.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many night vision goggles have been (a) lost and (b) stolen in Afghanistan in each year since 2001.
Asked by
Andrew Rosindell
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Stamford
(Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
25 November 2009
For answer on
30 November 2009
Answered on
3 December 2009
Information on lost and stolen night vision goggles in Afghanistan is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Losses are recorded by individual units but information is not aggregated centrally.
Subjects
Peacekeeping operations; Afghanistan
Date
3 December 2009
Reference
501 c898W; 302819
House
House of Commons