Porton Down (Hansard, 10 June 1993)

§ Mr. Hanley

These are matters for the chief executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment and I have asked him to reply.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Elfyn Llwyd, dated 10 June 1993 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking how many liaison officers from the United States Department of Defense have been stationed at his Department's Chemical and Biological Warfare Establishment at Porton Down since 1963; if he will outline the functions undertaken by such visiting liaison officers; and how many came as part of the Technical Co-operation Programme (Question 16, Order Paper, 27 May 1993) has been passed to me to reply as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment. 2. Four US Army liaison officers were stationed at Porton Down from 1963 to 1973. After 1973, liaison has continued at a much reduced level through the US Army Standardisation Office in London. The original US Army liaison officers were first appointed in 1942 and pre-date the Tripartite Conferences and the later TTCP. They have their roots in informal World War II co-operation. Their functions appear to have been to act as a channel for the exchange of information and to observe and participate in relevant trials of interest to the United States. 3. Since 1973, there have been a number of attachments of US civilian and military officers to Porton Down who have been engaged in the work of particular Divisions; they have not had a general liaison responsibility. These attachments have been under either the Technical Co-operation Programme or the UK/US/Canada Memorandum of Understanding on chemical and biological defence. During the past 10 years we have had some six attachments lasting for about a year or longer in addition to short term visits.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Elfyn Llwyd, dated 10 June 1993: 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what collaboration has taken place between his Department and the Government of Australia in relation to chemical and biological defence since 1962 (Question 18, Order Paper, 27 May 1993) has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment. 2. Collaboration between the United Kingdom and the Government of Australia on chemical and biological defence has taken place under the following international agreements which include chemical and biological defence in their scope: 337W

a. The United Kingdom-United States-Canada-Australia American, British and Canadian Armies (ABCA) agreement between the armies of the four countries. This includes a group known as the Quadripartite Working Group (QWG) which has a Panel on NBC defence.
b. The United Kingdom-United States-Canada-Australia Air Standardisation Coordinating Committee which has a sub group addressing CB defence.
c. The Technical Cooperation Programme which involves the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand is concerned with collaboration in defence research and has a sub group that is active on CB defence.
d. The Anglo-Australian Memorandum of Understanding on Research (AAMOUR) which was preceded by the. Australian/UK Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Defence Research and Development and which contained some CB defence related topics.
e. A Memorandum of Agreement between the UK and Australia relating to a joint programme of reseach, investigation and material testing at the JTTRE which was an out-station of the Materiels Research Laboratory (MRL) of the Australian Department of Defence and is now designated as MRL-Queensland.

3. In addition, I would refer you to the replies to several recent questions on the testing of chemical and biological defence equipment in'Australia (29 June 1992, Offical Report, Column 412; 16 July 1992, Official Report, Column 937; and 1 December 1992, Official Report, Column 162).

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Elfyn Llwyd, dated 10 June 1993: 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking how many achievement awards have been granted under the Technical Co-operation Programme at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment at Porton Down in each year since 1963; what was the scientific purpose behind each award made; and if he will make a statement on the role and function of the Technical Co-operation Programme (Question 21, Order Paper, 27 May 1993) has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemcial and Biological Defence Establishment. 2. At their 25th Anniversary meeting in October 1983 the Non-Atomic Military Research and Development (NAMRAD) Principals agreed that they should establish an award to mark outstanding collaboration in defence research undertaken under the auspices of the Technical Co-operation Programme (TTCP). The basic purpose of the award is to provide recognition to defence scientists and visibility to defence research which acids to the defence postures of all countries. Only outstanding co-operative research work is considered for such awards and must represent original research which can provide breakthroughs in defence technologies. The first award was made in 1985 and there have been three awards to CBDE scientists as follows:

(a) In 1985 an award was made for research in the field of "Ion mobility spectrometry for chemical warfare agent detection".
(b) In 1990 an award was made for research on the chemcial and biological threat of aerosolized agents.
(c) In 1991 an award was made for work on the specification for ASC/TEDA charcoal.

3. Insofar as to the role and function of the Technical Cooperation Programme are concerned, I would refer you to the reply given by the Minister of State for the Armed Forces, The Right Honourable Archie Hamilton, MP, of 1 December 1992, Official Report, column 160 which sets out the original purpose behind the TTCP. The Technical Co-operation Programme provides a means of acquainting the participating countries with each others defence research and development programmes so that each national programme may be adjusted and planned in recognition of the efforts of the other nations. This process supplements each programme with the knowledge and capabilities of the other countries, avoids unnecessary duplication among the national programmes, promotes concerted action to identify and close important gaps in the collective technology base, and assure to each 338W country the best technical information available for advice to their Governments and military forces on all matters related to defence research and development.