CAAB

Reports
Campaign for the 
Accountability
of
 
American 
Bases

CAAB Home Page

Parliamentary Questions

Ballistic Missile Defence: USA

Mr. Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what discussions his Department has had with the US Administration on plans to develop missile silos and x-band radar on land or sea bases in the UK; [158620]

(2) what discussions he and officials from his Department have had with the US Administration on plans to site interceptor missiles or related equipment in the UK. [158621]

Des Browne [holding answer 16 October 2007]: The Ministry of Defence continues to discuss ballistic missile defence issues with the US Administration. It is not the practice of the Government to make public details of all discussions with foreign governments as this would, or would be likely to, prejudice international relations. As I set out in my statement of 25 July 2007, Official Report column 72WS, we have no plans to site missile interceptors in the UK.

17 October 2007

L

 

US Missile Defence

9. Danny Alexander (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey) (LD): If he will make a statement on his Department’s policy on the UK’s involvement in the US missile defence system. [165625]

12. Paul Holmes (Chesterfield) (LD): What his policy is on the UK’s participation in the US missile defence system; and if he will make a statement. [165629]

The Minister for Europe (Mr. Jim Murphy): The UK contributes to the US missile defence system through our operation of the radar at RAF Fylingdales, the data relay station at RAF Menwith Hill and our well-established technical co-operation programmes.

Danny Alexander: In February, the then Prime Minister promised a debate in the House on the UK’s involvement in the US missile defence system. However, the Secretary of State for Defence later turned down such a debate in a letter to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for North-East Fife (Sir Menzies Campbell). Does the Minister agree that a full parliamentary debate will be necessary before the United Kingdom takes any further steps in support of yet another controversial, unilateral and highly dangerous United States policy?

Mr. Murphy: There has been no official request from the USA; as the hon. Gentleman knows, such issues are for the usual channels. There is a genuine issue about how the international community, particularly Europe, deals with the potential threat to the UK and Europe from a rogue state firing a missile across Europe. That is why we have given our support to the proposals at the moment in respect of the capacity of the deployment in both Poland and the Czech Republic. That is an important part of the wider defence of both the United Kingdom and Europe and against the potential firing of a missile by a rogue state, and particularly from one in the middle east.

Paul Holmes: Is the Minister aware that the programme has already cost the US more than $100 billion, yet its technology is unproven and does not work? The programme is designed to guard against an unforeseen future threat, yet it is destabilising Europe now. Is it not the most dangerous and expensive white elephant in history? How much will it cost British taxpayers?

Mr. Murphy: With respect, I think that that is an absolutely ridiculous assessment of the situation. The fact is that there is the potential threat of a rogue state attacking Europe, in the future, by the use of such missiles. It would be irresponsible in the extreme if we were not to, yes, participate with the United States, yes, have discussions with Poland and the Czech Republic, and yes—and importantly—have them with our NATO allies and friends about how best to protect ourselves and our European neighbours from a potential attack from a rogue and dangerously evolving threat.

20 Nov 2007 : Column 1095

 

 

Mr. Soames: The byelaws, when made, will be signed by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence. As with all other Ministry of Defence sites, the authorisation for purposes of enforcement of byelaws will be signed by the senior United Kingdom officer with security responsibilities at the establishment concerned; at Menwith Hill Station this is at present the chief inspector, Ministry of Defence police.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish or place in the Library the precise wording of the security of tenure document regarding the leasing of Menwith Hill Station to the National Security Agency of America.     [33947]

Mr. Soames: This is a confidential administrative arrangements between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States. It would therefore not be appropriate to publish or to comment on the details of such arrangements.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what grounds it is necessary to introduce new byelaws at Menwith Hill Station in addition to existing criminal and civil remedies to deter intruders.     [33960]

Mr. Soames: The Menwith Hill Station byelaws are the first set in a complete revision of byelaws for all establishments which we consider require them. They are intended to provide protection for all MOD establishments where other criminal or civil law does not provide sufficient remedy.


Column 678

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people have appealed against their convictions under the HMS Forest Moor and Menwith Hill Station Byelaws 1986 since they were declared defective on their face in the High Court in July 1992; how many of these appeals were contested; and how many were (a) upheld and (b) dismissed.     [33953]

Mr. Soames: The information requested is not held by my Department.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the United States Army handed control of Menwith Hill Station to the USAF/NSA electronic surveillance group; for what reasons the transfer of control was made; what parliamentary procedures applied; if the change of control fell within the remit of the terms of the War Office/USAF agreement on 11 December 1951 under which the USAF were given the right to occupy and control RAF bases in Britain; and whether this agreement extends to non- Royal Air Force bases.     [33949]

Mr. Soames: In 1966, with the agreement of Her Majesty's Government, Menwith Hill Station became a field element of the National Security Agency. United States forces use Menwith Hill Station under confidential arrangements between the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States of America. It is not our policy to comment on the details of such arrangements.

US Forces

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many times, when and by whom the ambassadors' agreement regarding American occupation of British Royal Air Force bases has been subjected to periodic review; and if he will place a copy of this agreement in the Library.     [33950]

Mr. Soames: It is not our policy to comment on the detail of confidential arrangements between the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States of America; the basis on which United States forces are stationed in the United Kingdom is contained in the NATO status of forces agreement of 1951.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what agreement exists between Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government, in their respective Defence Departments, to allow American personnel who are occupying and controlling British bases to employ psychological operations units against British subjects either inside or outside of these bases.     [33958]

Mr. Soames: No such operations are undertaken in this country by the US forces against British subjects.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British RAF bases are occupied and controlled by the US Department of Defense; if he will list those bases by name; how many non-RAF bases are similarly occupied and controlled; if he will list those bases; how many of those RAF and non-RAF bases employ members of the National Security Agency of America; and if he will list such bases.     [33951]


Column 679

Mr. Soames: As of 1 July 1995, bases and facilities were made available to the United States Department of Defence at the following locations:

Main Operating Bases

RAF Lakenheath

RAF Mildenhall

Standby Deployment Base

RAF Fairford

Storage/Support Facilities

RAF Alconbury

RAF Brawdy

Chilwell

RAF Daws Hill

Eastcote

Framlingham

RAF Hythe

London USN Europe HQ

RAF Molesworth

RAF Northwood

Oakington

RAF Spadeadam

RAF Watton

RAF Welford

West Ruislip

Wartime Contingency Hospitals

RAF Arbroath

RAF Nocton Hall

RAF Upwood

Communications Facilities

RAF Barford St John

RAF Barkway

Botley Hill

Bovingdon

RAF Chelveston

RAF Chicksands

Christmas Common

Coldblow

RAF Croughton

RAF Daventry

RAF Dunkirk

RAF Edzell

RAF Feltwell

Menwith Hill Station

RAF Oakhanger

RAF St Mawgan

RAF Swingate

RAF Uxbridge

NATO Armaments Depot

Glen Douglas

While these have been made available for use by United States visiting forces, Her Majesty's Government retain legal possession of the sites and control over the use that is made of them and their facilities. It is not our policy to comment in further detail on operational matters.

US Communication Centres

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many US Department of Defense


Column 680

communication centres operate from British soil; and if he will list them and the agencies by which their workers are

employed.     [33952]

Mr. Soames: As of 1 July 1995, there were 18 United States Department of Defense communications facilities in the UK as follows:

RAF Barford St John

RAF Barkway

Botley Hill

Bovingdon

RAF Chelveston

RAF Chicksands

Christmas Common

Coldblow

RAF Croughton

RAF Daventry

RAF Dunkirk

RAF Edzell

RAF Feltwell

Menwith Hill Station

RAF Oakhangar

RAF St Mawgan

RAF Swingate

RAF Uxbridge

It is not our policy to give details of personnel assignment.

Public Interest Immunity Certificates

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many public interest immunity certificates he has issued during the last five years; and if he will list them.     [33955]

Mr. Soames: I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark) on 3 July 1995, Official Report , column 92 .

National Security Agency of America

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the National Security Agency of America operates from (a) RAF Croughton and (b) RAF Chicksands.     [33957]

Mr. Soames: RAF Croughton and RAF Chicksands are US Department of Defense communications centres managed by the United States Air Force. It is not our policy to comment further on operational matters.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the United States Army handed control of Menwith Hill Station to the USAF/NSA electronic surveillance group; for what reasons the transfer of control was made; what parliamentary procedures applied; if the change of control fell within the remit of the terms of the War Office/USAF agreement on 11 December 1951 under which the USAF were given the right to occupy and control RAF bases in Britain; and whether this agreement extends to non- Royal Air Force bases.     [33949]

Mr. Soames: In 1966, with the agreement of Her Majesty's Government, Menwith Hill Station became a field element of the National Security Agency. United States forces use Menwith Hill Station under confidential arrangements between the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States of America. It is not our policy to comment on the details of such arrangements.

US Forces

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many times, when and by whom the ambassadors' agreement regarding American occupation of British Royal Air Force bases has been subjected to periodic review; and if he will place a copy of this agreement in the Library.     [33950]

Mr. Soames: It is not our policy to comment on the detail of confidential arrangements between the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States of America; the basis on which United States forces are stationed in the United Kingdom is contained in the NATO status of forces agreement of 1951.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what agreement exists between Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government, in their respective Defence Departments, to allow American personnel who are occupying and controlling British bases to employ psychological operations units against British subjects either inside or outside of these bases.     [33958]

Mr. Soames: No such operations are undertaken in this country by the US forces against British subjects.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British RAF bases are occupied and controlled by the US Department of Defense; if he will list those bases by name; how many non-RAF bases are similarly occupied and controlled; if he will list those bases; how many of those RAF and non-RAF bases employ members of the National Security Agency of America; and if he will list such bases.     [33951]


Column 679

Mr. Soames: As of 1 July 1995, bases and facilities were made available to the United States Department of Defence at the following locations:

Main Operating Bases

RAF Lakenheath

RAF Mildenhall

Standby Deployment Base

RAF Fairford

Storage/Support Facilities

RAF Alconbury

RAF Brawdy

Chilwell

RAF Daws Hill

Eastcote

Framlingham

RAF Hythe

London USN Europe HQ

RAF Molesworth

RAF Northwood

Oakington

RAF Spadeadam

RAF Watton

RAF Welford

West Ruislip

Wartime Contingency Hospitals

RAF Arbroath

RAF Nocton Hall

RAF Upwood

Communications Facilities

RAF Barford St John

RAF Barkway

Botley Hill

Bovingdon

RAF Chelveston

RAF Chicksands

Christmas Common

Coldblow

RAF Croughton

RAF Daventry

RAF Dunkirk

RAF Edzell

RAF Feltwell

Menwith Hill Station

RAF Oakhanger

RAF St Mawgan

RAF Swingate

RAF Uxbridge

NATO Armaments Depot

Glen Douglas

While these have been made available for use by United States visiting forces, Her Majesty's Government retain legal possession of the sites and control over the use that is made of them and their facilities. It is not our policy to comment in further detail on operational matters.

US Communication Centres

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many US Department of Defense


Column 680

communication centres operate from British soil; and if he will list them and the agencies by which their workers are

employed.     [33952]

Mr. Soames: As of 1 July 1995, there were 18 United States Department of Defense communications facilities in the UK as follows:

RAF Barford St John

RAF Barkway

Botley Hill

Bovingdon

RAF Chelveston

RAF Chicksands

Christmas Common

Coldblow

RAF Croughton

RAF Daventry

RAF Dunkirk

RAF Edzell

RAF Feltwell

Menwith Hill Station

RAF Oakhangar

RAF St Mawgan

RAF Swingate

RAF Uxbridge

It is not our policy to give details of personnel assignment.

Public Interest Immunity Certificates

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many public interest immunity certificates he has issued during the last five years; and if he will list them.     [33955]

Mr. Soames: I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark) on 3 July 1995, Official Report , column 92 .

National Security Agency of America

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the National Security Agency of America operates from (a) RAF Croughton and (b) RAF Chicksands.     [33957]

Mr. Soames: RAF Croughton and RAF Chicksands are US Department of Defense communications centres managed by the United States Air Force. It is not our policy to comment further on operational matters.

 

CAAB Home Page