HC Deb 05 May 2004 vol 420 cc1524-5W
Mr. Breed

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the(a) establishment and (b) strength of all ranks above OF 2 in the (i) Royal Navy and (ii) RAF was on the latest date for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. [161059]

Mr. Ingram

As at 1 January 2004, the trained strength and requirement for all ranks above OF 2 in the Naval Service and RAF are shown as follows. The tables show figures for each equivalent NATO rank and these are set out as follows:

Naval Service1
Rank Trained strength Requirement Surplus/Deficit
OF 9 4 3 +1
OF 8 7 10 -3
OF 7 30 28 +2
OF 6 99 91 +8
OF 5 280 270 2—
OF 4 1,080 1,200 -120
OF 3 2,460 2,530 -70
All OF 3 and above 3,950 4,130 -180
1Naval service figures include Royal Navy and Royal Marines.
2Less than five.

RAF
Rank

(1)

 Trained strength Requirement Surplus/Deficit
OF 6 to OF 91 120 100 +20
OF 5 320 250 +70
OF 4 1,150 940 +210
OF 3 2,550 2,430 +120
(2)
Specialists2 390 400 -20
(3)
All OF 3 and above 4,530 4,130 +400
1The Trained Manpower Requirement (TMR03) does not break down the requirement by individual rank for OF 6 (Air Cdre) and above.
2Specialists are excluded from (1) and shown separately as a total of all OF 3s and above. Due to the way Specialists are posted, a rank breakdown is not readily available. Specialists are in the following branches: Medical, Med Spt, Dental, Chaplains, Legal and Princess Mary's Royal Air Force Nursing Service.
Note:
All figures over 100 and any derived from these figures are rounded to the nearest 10.

NATO Rank codes and UK Service Designations
Royal Navy1 Royal Marines1 Army Royal Air Force
OF 3 Lieutenant Commander Major Major Squadron Leader
OF 2 Lieutenant Captain Captain Flight Lieutenant
OF 1 Sub-Lieutenant Lieutenant/2nd Lieutenant Lieutenant/2nd Lieutenant Flying Officer/Pilot Officer
OF(D) Midshipman — Officer Designate Officer Designate
1The Royal Navy and the Royal Marines together make up the Naval Service.

Mr. Breed

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the differences between strength and establishment of officers in the Army. [161060]

Mr. Ingram

A comparison between current liability and current strength of Army officers is shown as follows:

Rank Liability Strength1
General/Lieutenant General 7 17
Major General 27 43
Brigadier 175 184
Colonel 546 561
Lieutenant Colonel 1,579 1,713
Major 4,540 4,723
Captain 4,850 4,465
Lieutenant/2nd Lieutenant 1,876 1,680
1As at January 2004.

The difference at Major and above is largely because the liability consists only of Army posts. Tri-Service rotational and competition posts and certain international appointments, for example to NATO, are not tied to British Army officers and therefore do not form part of the liability. In practice the Army does not carry a substantial surplus of officers, although there is provision for small margin to cover those in training and on resettlement prior to retirement.

The difference at Captain and below is due to a combination of factors. In recent years, the output from the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, which is affected by both input and throughput, has not achieved the target. The number of junior officers is therefore lower than the requirement. The RMAS output target is now being met. Some posts are rank-ranged. In these instances the liability is shown against the lower rank although the incumbent may be of a higher rank. Officers holding temporary acting rank are shown against the strength at the higher paid rank.