§ Mr. HancockTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost to his Department was of Operation Desert Fox; what this operation achieved; what impact the operation had on UK relations with France; and if he will make a statement. [104230]
§ Mr. HoonOperation Desert Fox was the name given to the December 1998 joint US-UK air operation against targets in Iraq. Information on the total cost of Operation Desert Fox cannot be reliably differentiated from the overall costs of military operations in the Gulf. The Ministry of Defence identifies the costs of operations in terms of the net additional costs it has incurred. The costs which the Ministry of Defence would have incurred had the operation not been undertaken for example—expenditure on wages and salaries or on conducting training exercises—are deducted from the total costs of the operation. The following table sets out the overall additional expenditure incurred by the Ministry of Defence as a direct result of operations in the Gulf in 1998–99 and 1999–2000, primarily enforcement of the No Fly Zones. Costs include operating costs for aircraft enforcing the No Fly Zones—primarily fuel and maintenance, plus the cost of maintaining personnel in-theatre. In-theatre costs include accommodation and utilities, equipment, plant, machinery, vehicles and allowances.
£ million 1998–99 35 1999–2000 28 The aims of Operation Desert Fox were to degrade Saddam Hussein's military capability and reduce the threat that he posed to his neighbours. These aims were achieved and Saddam Hussein's war machine was seriously weakened. Contemporary estimates indicated that 87 per cent. of targets were either destroyed or damaged. A report on the results of Operation Desert Fox was sent to all Members of the House on 18 January 1999 and a copy was placed in the Library of the House.
The United Kingdom continues to work closely with France as one of its key European partners.
17W
§ Mr. HancockTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost to his Department was of maintaining a presence in the Persian Gulf in each year since 1997; what this money was spent on; how he estimates this figure will change in the aftermath of a war in the region; and if he will make a statement. [104315]
§ Mr. IngramThe Department identifies the costs of Operations in terms of the net additional costs it has incurred. The costs which the Department would have incurred had the operation not been undertaken, expenditure on wages and salaries or on conducting training exercises for example, are not included in the total costs of the operation. The following table sets out the overall additional expenditure incurred by the Department as a direct result of operations in the Gulf, primarily enforcement of the No Fly Zones. Costs include operating costs for aircraft enforcing the No Fly Zones—primarily fuel and maintenance, plus the cost of maintaining personnel in-theatre. In-theatre costs include accommodation and utilities, equipment, plant, machinery, vehicles and allowances.
£ million 1997–98 16 1998–99 35 1999–2000 28 2000–01 25 2001–02 161 2002–03 (estimate) 145 1 Denotes figure calculated on a full resource cost basis; all previous figures are cash-based. This does not include the cost of Operation Telic, forecast at £1 billion for 2002–03. I am withholding a more detailed breakdown of the figures for this operation in accordance with Exemption 1 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information as it could compromise operational planning and the security of our Servicemen and women.
It is too early to say what costs might be incurred by forces required following operations in Iraq.