HC Deb 20 December 1994 vol 251 cc1172-9W
Mr. Cohen

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence to which defence establishment in Australia the G agent intermediate Di-Di and the CR gas was transported in each case referred to in his answer of 24 June 1994,Official Report, column 381.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr Harry Cohen, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking to which defence establishment in Australia the G agent intermediate di-di and the CR gas was transported in each case referred to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the UK Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat that chemical and biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measures evaluated.
  3. 3. Our records do not indicate to which defence establishment in Australia the G agent intermediate di-di and the V agent intermediate referred to in my answer of 24 June 1994 were transported. As I mentioned the materials, suitably packaged, were transported to London for onward transportation to Australia. It is probable that the materials went to the Materials Research Laboratory in Melbourne.

Mr. Cohen

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence from which source the CR gas was obtained for the tests with service volunteers in the specified years referred to in his answer to the hon. Member for Leyton on 24 June 1994,Official Report, column 383.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr Harry Cohen, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking from which source the CR gas was obtained for the tests with Service volunteers in the specified years referred to in his Answer to the honourable Member for Leyton on 24th June 1994, Official Report, column 383 has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the UK Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat that chemical and biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measures evaluated.
  3. 3. The CR gas referred to in my answer of 14 June 1994, Official Report, column 383 would have been synthesised either at this Establishment or at the Chemical Defence Establishment at Nancekuke.

Mr. Cohen

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence in which years the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down, tested CN gas on service personnel in the human volunteer programme; what was the purpose of these tests; how the gas was administered to the volunteers; how many service volunteers were tested with this gas; and where the results of these tests were published in open literature.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Harry Cohen, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking in which years the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down, tested CN gas on Service personnel in the human volunteer programme; what was the purpose of these tests; how the gas was administered to the volunteers; how many Service volunteers were tested with this gas; and where the results of these tests were published in open literature has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use Service volunteers to:
    1. a. assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures,
    2. b. develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
    3. c. evaluate the effects of very low and medically safe concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally.
    4. No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
  3. 3. CN gas, otherwise known as chloracetophenone, was used in the early part of this century as a military tear gas, a riot control 1174 agent, a training aid, and as the standard agent for respirator testing in the Armed Services and civil defence. Although it has now been abandoned by the UK for all these purposes, our records indicate that it was extensively studied at Porton Down least 1924. It is probable that there were some studies at that time involving Service volunteers. However, our records in the inter-war years are not in a format from which we could extract details about the number of service volunteers tested and the years in which they were tested.
  4. 4. During the period that CN gas was studied at Porton Down it would have been disseminated using the following techniques:
    1. a. pyrotechnic formulations
    2. b. a spray from an alcoholic solution
    3. c. bursting munitions (bombs), grenades, largely, and
    4. d. small glass capsules containing solid CN heated to bursting and release the compound.
  5. 5. Our records do not indicate which of these techniques would have been used in any of the human volunteer studies. There are three publications which provide some information on CN:
    1. a. The comparative opthalmictoxicology of chloracetophenone (CN) and dibenoxazepine (CR). B Ballantyne, M F Gazzard, D W Swanston and P Williams. Arch. Toxicol. 1975., 34183–201.
    2. b. Chemical agents used in control and warfare. F W Beswick. Human Toxicol. 1983, 2 247–256.
    3. c. Riot control agents. Bryan Ballantyne. Medical Annual 1977, John Wright, Bristol.
    4. There appear to be few, if any, publications on CN from the inter-war years.

Mr. Cohen

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what grounds(a) the policy on female service volunteers, referred to in his answer of 24 June 1994, Official Report, column 380, was changed in 1972 and (b) female service personnel had not been invited to participate in the human volunteer programme before this year.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Harry Cohen dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking on what grounds (a) the policy on female Service volunteers, referred to in his Answer of 24 June 1994, Official Report, column 380, was changed in this year and (b) female personnel had not been invited to participate in the human volunteer programme before this year has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use Service volunteers to:
    1. (a) assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures,
    2. (b) develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
    3. (c) evaluate the effects of very low and medically safe concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally.
    4. No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
  3. 3. It is not possible from our records to determine whether there was a policy change in 1972 with regard to the participation of female Service volunteers. We believe that there was a change in perception of the importance of female Service personnel. However, 1175 female Service personnel will only be accepted for participation in studies at CBDE where the CBDE Ethics Committee has approved the relevant protocol and agreed that female volunteers may participate.

Mr. Cohen

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the assessment drawn from the research into the stabilisation of the nerve agent GD referred to in his answer of 24 June 1994,Official Report, columns 378–79; and from which source the nerve agent was obtained.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Harry Cohen dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what was the assessment drawn from the research into the stabilisation of the nerve agent GD referred to in his Answer of 24 June 1994, Official Report, columns 378–9, and from which source the nerve agent was obtained has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat that chemical and biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measures evaluated.
  3. 3. In my earlier answer to you of 24 June (Official Report, columns 378–9), I said that CBDE had carried out work on the nerve agent GD and in particular its stability in order to evaluate the feasibility and hazard of the use of such an agent against the United Kingdom Armed Forces. The assessment was that with an appropriate stabiliser there was little decomposition of GD stored at 71°C for three years. It was shown that GD stored with the stabiliser in mild steel vessels was virtually unchanged after three years. The GD was produced at Nancekuke.

Mr. Cohen

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what were the conclusions of the studies referred to in his answer of 24 June 1994,Official Report, column 383, on CR gas on service volunteers in relation to the skin and eye sensitivity tests; with which other countries the results of these studies were shared; when the results were shared; and under which defence agreement the results were exchanged.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr Harry Cohen, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what were the conclusions of the studies referred to in his Answer of 24 June 1994, Official Report column 383, on CR gas on Service volunteers in relation to the skin and eye sensitivity tests; with which other countries the results of these studies were shared; when the results were shared; and under which defence agreement the results were exchanged has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use Service volunteers to:
    3. 1176
    1. a. assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures.
    2. b. develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
    3. c. evaluate the effects of very low and medically safe concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally.
    4. No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
  3. 3. The studies on CR gas in relation to the skin and eye sensitivity tests referred to in my answer of 24 June 1994, (Official Report, column 383) concluded that CR was found to have certain advantages over CS in specific situations. Its potency was found to be approximately ten times greater than that of CS and its toxicity is low in comparison with the other irritants. It is capable of use in both aerosol and solution form.
  4. 4. The results of this work have formed part of the chemical and biological defence programme and is part of the technical database drawn upon in collaboration with the United States, Australia and Canada under the Technical Cooperation Programme and its predecessors and with the United States and Canada under the Memorandum of Understanding on Chemical and Biological Defence.

Mr. Livingstone

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence in what years the studies with service volunteers were undertaken at the Cambridge military hospital, referred to in his answer of 24 June 1994,Official Report, column 375; what was the purpose and conclusion of these studies; how many studies were carried out at this hospital; and how many service volunteers were involved in these tests.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of state for Defence asking in what years the studies with Service volunteers were undertaken at the Cambridge Military Hospital, referred to in his Answer of 24th June 1994, Official Report, column 375, were undertaken; what was the purpose and conclusions of these studies; how many studies were carried out at this hospital; and how many Service volunteers were involved in these tests has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use Service volunteers to:
    1. a. assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures,
    2. b. develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
    3. c. evaluate the effects of very low and medically safe concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally.
    4. No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
  3. 3. The Nerve Agent Pretreatment Set (NAPS) was developed in response to a requirement which called for a pretreatment effective against poisoning by all known nerve agents. A number of studies were conducted by the Chemical and Biological Defence Establish to identify the effective oral dose regime which used in conjunction 1177 with therapy would provide protection against nerve agent poisoning whilst producing minimal or nil side effects.
  4. 4. One of these studies took place at the Cambridge Military Hospital in 1993. Thirty two of the military staff of the hospital volunteered to take part and the conclusions of the study agreed with earlier findings that the side effects from the taking of NAPS were minimal and did not interfere with military efficiency.

Mr. Livingstone

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the nature of the study referred to in his answer of 24 June,Official Report, column 378, which prompted the service volunteer to withdraw following the detailed explanation of the protocol.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what was the nature of the study referred to in his Answer of 24th June, Official Report, column 378, which prompted the Service volunteer to withdraw following the detailed explanation of the protocol has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. In order to carry out this work, it is necessary to use Service volunteers to
    1. a. assess the ability of Service personnel to function with new equipment and procedures,
    2. b. develop medical countermeasures to protect Service personnel and
    3. c. evaluate the effects of very low and medically safe concentrations of CW agents on the ability of unprotected personnel to operate normally.
    4. No studies involving volunteers are carried out unless there is a clear military need and a detailed protocol has been reviewed and approved by an independent Ethics Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Royal College of Physicians.
  3. 3. The volunteer who withdrew from the study referred to in my answer of 24 June, Official Report, Column 378, was taking part in a climatic study whilst wearing Individual Protective Equipment. The protocol for the study required some blood samples to be taken but the volunteer was uneasy about this and exercised his right to withdraw from the study.

Mr. Livingstone

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the conclusion drawn from the studies on VX referred to in his answer of 24 June,Official Report, column 371, to determine whether or not this agent was producible in quantity and was stable when stored.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down, under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive, CBDE to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what was the conclusion drawn from the studies on VX referred to in his answer of 24 June, Official Report, column 371, to determine whether or not this agent was producible in quantity and was stable when stored has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat the chemical and biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical 1178 and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measure evaluated.
  3. 3. The conclusion drawn from the stability studies referred to in my answer of 24 June 1994, Official Report, column 372, was that VX could be produced on a large-scale and that the product could be stabilised. The studies showed that using a suitable stabiliser VX could be stored under nitrogen in mild steel containers; storage could not be achieved in containers of other materials. These conclusions taken together with others supported the assessment that VX would present a significant battlefield hazard.

Mr. Livingstone

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the purpose of the research on the nerve agent GB between 1979 and 1993 at Nancekuke as described in his answer of 11 January 1994,Official Report, columns 163–64; what quantities of nerve agent were used in this research; if the results of this research were shared with any other countries; and under which defence agreement this occurred.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive, CBDE to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone, dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what was the purpose of the research on the nerve agent GB between 1979 and 1993 at Nancekuke as described in his answer of 11th January 1994, Official Report, column 163–4; what quantities of nerve agent were used in this research; if the results of this research were shared with any other countries; and under which defence agreement this occurred has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat that chemical and biological weapons may be used against them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measure evaluated.
  3. 3. In my earlier answer to you of 1 1 th January 1994 (Official Report, column 163-164), I advised you that the approximate periods during which research was carried out at Nancekuke was from 1951 to 1976. The Chemical Defence Establishment at Nancekuke was closed in 1980 and was handed back to the RAF. By 1979 the closure process was well advanced and few personnel remained on site. There was, therefore, no research carried out at Nancekuke on the nerve agent, GB, after 1979.

Mr. Livingstone

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the conclusion drawn from the work carried out on the substituted analogues of VX at Nancekuke, referred to in his answer of 24 June,Official Report, column 371.

Mr. Soames

This is a matter for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive, CBDE to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Graham Pearson to Mr. Ken Livingstone dated 19 December 1994:

  1. 1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what was the conclusion drawn from the work carried out on the substituted analogues of VX at Nancekuke, referred to in his Answer of 24th June, Official Report, column 371 has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.
  2. 2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to carry out work to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces are provided with effective protective measures against the threat that chemical and biological weapons may be used aganst them. As part of this work the potential hazard of possible chemical 1179 and biological warfare agents is assessed and the effectiveness of British protective measure evaluated.
  3. 3. The conclusion drawn from the work with VX analogues showed that these compounds were unlikely to provide any advantage over VX as a chemical warfare agent to a potential aggressor.

Forward to