1-12 of 12 results for subject:Defence
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.192 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.01 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Defence
- We searched for
- subject_t:Defence OR subject_t:"National defence" OR subject_ses:90842
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 25 February 2016 to Question 27212, on what data work commenced on Joint Services Policy (JSP) 900 UK Targeting Policy - Edition 2.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 25 February 2016 to Question 27212, on what data work commenced on Joint Services Policy (JSP) 900 UK Targeting Policy - Edition 2.
Work to create JSP 900 UK Targeting Policy Edition 2 began in January 2014 and the document was in the process of being finalised in September 2014. However, further work was required to ensure the Ministry of Defence's Full Spectrum Targeting (FSpecT) policy was coherent with the evolving National Full Spectrum Effects (FSE) approach.
In September 2015 Defence Instructions and Notices (DIN) 2015DIN03-024 "Full Spectrum Effects For Defence Operations" was released. The DIN set the framework for FSpecT policy within FSE; JSP 900 Edition 2 was released shortly afterwards. A review of JSP 900 Edition 2 is under way and it is expected that a new edition will be required to incorporate lessons identified from operations in Iraq and Syria.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will place a copy of the UK Joint Targeting and Battle Damage Assessment Policy paper, dated 2005, in the Library.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will place a copy of the UK Joint Targeting and Battle Damage Assessment Policy paper, dated 2005, in the Library.
The UK Joint Targeting and Battle Damage Assessment Policy paper, dated 2005 established the baseline principles primarily for coordinating the delivery of lethal effects. This paper has been superseded by Joint Services Policy (JSP) 900 UK Targeting Policy - Edition 2 dated September 2015 which contains the policy and direction on targeting, and guidance on the processes involved and best practice to apply. UK Targeting policy has evolved to incorporate operational lessons identified through Full Spectrum Targeting, apportioning action (lethal and non-lethal) in accordance with desired policy outcomes, and to bring greater interoperability between the UK, NATO and the 5 Eyes Nations (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US ). JSP 900 cannot yet be placed in the public domain as it would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the Armed Forces and forces cooperating with them. However, we are working to produce a releasable version which is to be published later in 2016.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what working definition of imminence his Department uses in the application of article 51 of the UN Charter.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what working definition of imminence his Department uses in the application of article 51 of the UN Charter.
It has long been the position of successive UK Governments that "the inherent right of self-defence", as recognised in Article 51 of the UN Charter, does not require a State to wait until an armed attack is actually under way before it can lawfully use force to alleviate the threat. A State may use force in anticipation of an armed attack where such an attack is imminent, provided that such force is both necessary and proportionate to averting the threat. The assessments would depend on the facts of each case, with consideration likely to include issues such as the nature and immediacy of the threat, the probability of an attack, its scale and effects and whether it can be prevented without force.
That this House calls on the Government to address the issues identified in the UK Approach to Unmanned Systems, a Joint Doctrinal Note written in 2011, in connection with the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR); notes the recommendations of the Defence Committee on the need for a current British doctrine in its 10th Report of Session 2013-14, on Remote Control: Remotely Piloted Air Systems - current and future use, HC 772; further notes that the conclusions of the Birmingham Policy Commission, The Security Impact of Drones: Challenges and Opportunities for the UK, include the absence of central direction; recognises the significant increase in the use of armed and unarmed drones since the 2010 SDSR; further recognises that the Scavenger Programme is intended to replace the Reaper with a sovereign, armed drone capability; and calls on the Government to devise and disclose a distinct and overarching policy on the use of British military drones as part of British defence strategy.
That this House calls on the Government to address the issues identified in the UK Approach to Unmanned Systems, a Joint Doctrinal Note written in 2011, in connection with the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR); notes the recommendations of the Defence Committee on the need for a current...
That this House notes that a decision on the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapon submarines is due in the life of this Parliament; further notes that the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) will precede that decision; recognises that international circumstances have significantly changed from those in which the current Trident missile system was conceived, designed and constructed; further recognises the Government's decision to require departments to reduce expenditure; and therefore calls on the Government to ensure that the SDSR sets out how it has considered the delivery of UK defence and security capability without nuclear weapons, including threat assessments, estimated costs and all non-nuclear options, as a basis for public debate ahead of the replacement decision.
That this House notes that a decision on the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapon submarines is due in the life of this Parliament; further notes that the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) will precede that decision; recognises that international circumstances have significantly changed from those in which the...
That this House welcomes the third conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons in Vienna on 8-9 December 2014 and the international momentum to understand and further the humanitarian agenda; notes with concern the catastrophic and global consequences of the use of nuclear weapons, from initial blast, heat and radiation to climate disruption and nuclear famine over decades, and the need for international engagement from both nuclear and non-nuclear armed states to forge a dialogue on this issue; further notes that 145 countries attended the conference in Mexico earlier this year; further notes with regret that the UK and the four other nuclear-armed members of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty-P5- have so far boycotted the previous two conferences; further notes that the US has now confirmed its attendance at the Vienna conference; and urges the UK to confirm its participation in the Vienna conference in December and play its part in shaping the discussion and initiative on the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons.
That this House welcomes the third conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons in Vienna on 8-9 December 2014 and the international momentum to understand and further the humanitarian agenda; notes with concern the catastrophic and global consequences of the use of nuclear weapons, from initial blast, heat and...
That the Amendment, done at Washington on 22 July 2014, to the Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the government of the United States of America for Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes (Cm. 8947), a copy of which was laid before this House on 16 October 2014, should not be ratified.
That the Amendment, done at Washington on 22 July 2014, to the Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the government of the United States of America for Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes (Cm. 8947), a...
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to ensure that any entity acquiring defence procurement contracts pay corporation tax in the UK.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to ensure that any entity acquiring defence procurement contracts pay corporation tax in the UK.
We would expect any entity acquiring or being awarded defence procurement contracts to pay corporation tax, where applicable, in line with current regulations.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much has been allocated for research and development funding in (a) 2014 and (b) 2015.
[158776]
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much has been allocated for research and development funding in (a) 2014 and (b) 2015.
[158776]
There is no fixed forward budget for research and development.
The Department's plans for funding research through the centralised Ministry of Defence Science and Technology Programme, under the Department's chief scientific adviser, are £410 million for 2013-14 and £435 million for 2014-15, rounded to the nearest £5 million, which meets our intention to sustain science and technology investment at a minimum of 1.2% of the Defence budget. Development expenditure is applied according to the requirements of individual projects (mostly as part of the equipment programme) and the plans for funding of the development elements of these projects are not centralised.
That this House notes the findings of the National Security Strategy that a nuclear weapon threat from another state is of low likelihood; further notes a procurement cost of £25 billion and an estimated lifetime cost of over £100 billion for the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapon system; believes that there are greater spending priorities both at the Ministry of Defence and across other departments; and urges the Government to cancel plans to replace Trident.
That this House notes the findings of the National Security Strategy that a nuclear weapon threat from another state is of low likelihood; further notes a procurement cost of £25 billion and an estimated lifetime cost of over £100 billion for the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapon system; believes...
Earlier tonight we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Ann Clwyd) about the situation in Iraq. She made the point that, for the first time in many years, the word "Iraq" was not mentioned in the Queen's Speech. However, the Queen did say that her...
Earlier tonight we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Ann Clwyd) about the situation in Iraq. She made the point that, for the first time in many years, the word "Iraq" was not mentioned in the Queen's Speech. However, the Queen did say that her...
Can the hon. Gentleman explain exactly which 50 per cent. he would cut?
Can the hon. Gentleman explain exactly which 50 per cent. he would cut?