Question: In what concept is the MoD considered a leader?

Answer: defence diplomacy

<hl> The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of " defence diplomacy ". <hl> As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "<hl> defence diplomacy <hl>". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of " <hl> defence diplomacy <hl> ".

question: In what concept is the MoD considered a leader?, context: The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.


Question: Who was the PM of Britain in 2010?

Answer: David Cameron

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". <hl> As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. <hl> The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister <hl> David Cameron <hl> signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

question: Who was the PM of Britain in 2010?, context: The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.


Question: Who was the president of France in 2010?

Answer: Nicolas Sarkozy

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". <hl> As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. <hl> The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President <hl> Nicolas Sarkozy <hl> that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

question: Who was the president of France in 2010?, context: The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.


Question: In which two countries is the UK installing military bases?

Answer: UAE and Bahrain

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. <hl> The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain . <hl> A presence in Oman is also being considered.

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the <hl> UAE and Bahrain <hl>. A presence in Oman is also being considered.

The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the <hl> UAE and Bahrain <hl> .

question: In which two countries is the UK installing military bases?, context: The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.


Question: In which other country is the UK thinking about installing a military base?

Answer: Oman

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. <hl> A presence in Oman is also being considered. <hl>

The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in <hl> Oman <hl> is also being considered.

question: In which other country is the UK thinking about installing a military base?, context: The MoD has since been regarded as a leader in elaborating the post-Cold War organising concept of "defence diplomacy". As a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron signed a 50-year treaty with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that would have the two countries co-operate intensively in military matters. The UK is establishing air and naval bases in the Persian Gulf, located in the UAE and Bahrain. A presence in Oman is also being considered.


Question: How much was the investment in new equipment and capabilities worth?

Answer: £178 billion

<hl> The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. <hl> The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:

The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included <hl> £178 billion <hl> investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:

question: How much was the investment in new equipment and capabilities worth?, context: The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:


Question: In which year was a £178 billion investment made?

Answer: 2015

<hl> The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. <hl> The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:

The Strategic Defence and Security Review <hl> 2015 <hl> included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:

question: In which year was a £178 billion investment made?, context: The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:


Question: How many primary missions were included in the 2015 Review?

Answer: four

The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. <hl> The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces: <hl>

The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with <hl> four <hl> primary missions for the Armed Forces:

question: How many primary missions were included in the 2015 Review?, context: The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:


Question: What is the name of the yearly statement released by the MoD?

Answer: The Strategic Defence and Security Review

<hl> The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. <hl> The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:

<hl> The Strategic Defence and Security Review <hl> 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:

question: What is the name of the yearly statement released by the MoD?, context: The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 included £178 billion investment in new equipment and capabilities. The review set a defence policy with four primary missions for the Armed Forces:


Question: What was the new threat that arose after the end of the Cold War?

Answer: terrorism

<hl> Following the end of the Cold War, the threat of direct conventional military confrontation with other states has been replaced by terrorism . <hl> Sir Richard Dannatt predicted British forces to be involved in combating "predatory non-state actors" for the foreseeable future, in what he called an "era of persistent conflict". He told the Chatham House think tank that the fight against al-Qaeda and other militant Islamist groups was "probably the fight of our generation".

Following the end of the Cold War, the threat of direct conventional military confrontation with other states has been replaced by <hl> terrorism <hl>. Sir Richard Dannatt predicted British forces to be involved in combating "predatory non-state actors" for the foreseeable future, in what he called an "era of persistent conflict". He told the Chatham House think tank that the fight against al-Qaeda and other militant Islamist groups was "probably the fight of our generation".

Following the end of the Cold War, the threat of direct conventional military confrontation with other states has been replaced by <hl> terrorism <hl> .

question: What was the new threat that arose after the end of the Cold War?, context: Following the end of the Cold War, the threat of direct conventional military confrontation with other states has been replaced by terrorism. Sir Richard Dannatt predicted British forces to be involved in combating "predatory non-state actors" for the foreseeable future, in what he called an "era of persistent conflict". He told the Chatham House think tank that the fight against al-Qaeda and other militant Islamist groups was "probably the fight of our generation".


Question: Military spending that is based on conventional threats has been dismissed as what?

Answer: Cold War mentality

<hl> Dannatt criticised a remnant " Cold War mentality ", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. <hl>

Dannatt criticised a remnant "<hl> Cold War mentality <hl>", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Dannatt criticised a remnant " <hl> Cold War mentality <hl> ", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

question: Military spending that is based on conventional threats has been dismissed as what?, context: Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Question: How much of the MoD's equipment budget is invested in the "land environment"?

Answer: 10%

<hl> Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. <hl>

Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only <hl> 10% <hl> of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

question: How much of the MoD's equipment budget is invested in the "land environment"?, context: Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Question: Where was Britain involved in a land war when some thought that land wars were basically a thing of the past?

Answer: Afghanistan and Iraq

<hl> Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq . <hl>

Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in <hl> Afghanistan and Iraq <hl>.

Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in <hl> Afghanistan and Iraq <hl> .

question: Where was Britain involved in a land war when some thought that land wars were basically a thing of the past?, context: Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Question: Which years make up the time span mentioned for the military budget numbers?

Answer: 2003 and 2018

<hl> Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. <hl>

Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between <hl> 2003 and 2018 <hl> was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

question: Which years make up the time span mentioned for the military budget numbers?, context: Dannatt criticised a remnant "Cold War mentality", with military expenditures based on retaining a capability against a direct conventional strategic threat; He said currently only 10% of the MoD's equipment programme budget between 2003 and 2018 was to be invested in the "land environment"—at a time when Britain was engaged in land-based wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Question: Who was the Chief of Defence Materiel in 2009?

Answer: General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue

<hl> The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue , had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. <hl> The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, <hl> General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue <hl>, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, <hl> General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue <hl> , had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed.

question: Who was the Chief of Defence Materiel in 2009?, context: The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.


Question: Which department is overseen by the Chief of Defence Materiel?

Answer: Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S)

<hl> The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. <hl> The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within <hl> Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) <hl> through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

question: Which department is overseen by the Chief of Defence Materiel?, context: The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.


Question: Which programme was mentioned as being underfunded?

Answer: Equipment Programme

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. <hl> The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme ; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. <hl> The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the <hl> Equipment Programme <hl>; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the <hl> Equipment Programme <hl> ; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns.

question: Which programme was mentioned as being underfunded?, context: The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.


Question: Who was the Secretary of State for Defence in 2009?

Answer: Bob Ainsworth MP

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. <hl> The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP , reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. <hl> In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, <hl> Bob Ainsworth MP <hl>, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The then Secretary of State for Defence, <hl> Bob Ainsworth MP <hl> , reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending.

question: Who was the Secretary of State for Defence in 2009?, context: The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.


Question: Which publication said the 2009 defence budget was more than 10% overbudget?

Answer: London Evening Standard

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. <hl> According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. <hl> The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the <hl> London Evening Standard <hl> the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.

question: Which publication said the 2009 defence budget was more than 10% overbudget?, context: The Defence Committee—Third Report "Defence Equipment 2009" cites an article from the Financial Times website stating that the Chief of Defence Materiel, General Sir Kevin O’Donoghue, had instructed staff within Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) through an internal memorandum to reprioritize the approvals process to focus on supporting current operations over the next three years; deterrence related programmes; those that reflect defence obligations both contractual or international; and those where production contracts are already signed. The report also cites concerns over potential cuts in the defence science and technology research budget; implications of inappropriate estimation of Defence Inflation within budgetary processes; underfunding in the Equipment Programme; and a general concern over striking the appropriate balance over a short-term focus (Current Operations) and long-term consequences of failure to invest in the delivery of future UK defence capabilities on future combatants and campaigns. The then Secretary of State for Defence, Bob Ainsworth MP, reinforced this reprioritisation of focus on current operations and had not ruled out "major shifts" in defence spending. In the same article the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Royal Navy, acknowledged that there was not enough money within the defence budget and it is preparing itself for tough decisions and the potential for cutbacks. According to figures published by the London Evening Standard the defence budget for 2009 is "more than 10% overspent" (figures cannot be verified) and the paper states that this had caused Gordon Brown to say that the defence spending must be cut. The MoD has been investing in IT to cut costs and improve services for its personnel.


Question: How much land is owned by the MoD?

Answer: 227,300 hectares

<hl> The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". <hl> The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning <hl> 227,300 hectares <hl> of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

question: How much land is owned by the MoD?, context: The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".


Question: How much is the land owned by the MoD worth?

Answer: £20 billion

<hl> The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion ". <hl> The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about <hl> £20 billion <hl>". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about <hl> £20 billion <hl> ".

question: How much is the land owned by the MoD worth?, context: The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".


Question: The MoD owns or has rights of access to what percentage of the UK's total land?

Answer: 1.8%

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. <hl> In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. <hl> The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about <hl> 1.8% <hl> of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

question: The MoD owns or has rights of access to what percentage of the UK's total land?, context: The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".


Question: How much is the annual cost to support the defence estate?

Answer: in excess of £3.3 billion

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. <hl> The total annual cost to support the defence estate is " in excess of £3.3 billion ". <hl>

The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "<hl> in excess of £3.3 billion <hl>".

The total annual cost to support the defence estate is " <hl> in excess of £3.3 billion <hl> ".

question: How much is the annual cost to support the defence estate?, context: The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".


Question: Who is one of the largest landowners in the UK?

Answer: The Ministry of Defence

<hl> The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". <hl> The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

<hl> The Ministry of Defence <hl> is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".

question: Who is one of the largest landowners in the UK?, context: The Ministry of Defence is one of the United Kingdom's largest landowners, owning 227,300 hectares of land and foreshore (either freehold or leasehold) at April 2014, which was valued at "about £20 billion". The MoD also has "rights of access" to a further 222,000 hectares. In total, this is about 1.8% of the UK land mass. The total annual cost to support the defence estate is "in excess of £3.3 billion".


Question: What percentage of the defence estate makes up training areas and ranges?

Answer: 84.0%

<hl> The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges ( 84.0% ), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). <hl> These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (<hl> 84.0% <hl>), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges ( <hl> 84.0% <hl> ), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%).

question: What percentage of the defence estate makes up training areas and ranges?, context: The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.


Question: What makes up the smallest portion of the defence estate?

Answer: storage & supply depots

<hl> The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). <hl> These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), <hl> storage & supply depots <hl> (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

question: What makes up the smallest portion of the defence estate?, context: The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.


Question: What percentage of the defence estate is taken up by airfields?

Answer: (3.4%

<hl> The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4% ), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). <hl> These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields <hl> (3.4% <hl>), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields <hl> (3.4% <hl> ), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%).

question: What percentage of the defence estate is taken up by airfields?, context: The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.


Question: Who manages the defence estate?

Answer: Defence Infrastructure Organisation

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). <hl> These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation . <hl>

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the <hl> Defence Infrastructure Organisation <hl>.

These are largely managed by the <hl> Defence Infrastructure Organisation <hl> .

question: Who manages the defence estate?, context: The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.


Question: Barracks and camps are what percentage of the defence estate?

Answer: (2.5%

<hl> The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5% ), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). <hl> These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps <hl> (2.5% <hl>), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.

The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps <hl> (2.5% <hl> ), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%).

question: Barracks and camps are what percentage of the defence estate?, context: The defence estate is divided as training areas & ranges (84.0%), research & development (5.4%), airfields (3.4%), barracks & camps (2.5%), storage & supply depots (1.6%), and other (3.0%). These are largely managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation.


Question: In what city are the headquarters of the MoD?

Answer: Whitehall

<hl> The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. <hl> This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The headquarters of the MoD are in <hl> Whitehall <hl> and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

question: In what city are the headquarters of the MoD?, context: The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.


Question: Who designed the headquarters of the MoD?

Answer: Vincent Harris

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. <hl> This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. <hl> The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by <hl> Vincent Harris <hl> to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

question: Who designed the headquarters of the MoD?, context: The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.


Question: Who designed the statues that are on either side of the northern entrance to the MoD headquarters?

Answer: Charles Wheeler

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. <hl> The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler . <hl> Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by <hl> Charles Wheeler <hl>. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by <hl> Charles Wheeler <hl> .

question: Who designed the statues that are on either side of the northern entrance to the MoD headquarters?, context: The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.


Question: What is the headquarters of the MoD called?

Answer: Main Building

<hl> The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building . <hl> This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as <hl> Main Building <hl>. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as <hl> Main Building <hl> .

question: What is the headquarters of the MoD called?, context: The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.


Question: Who made the Gurkha Monument?

Answer: Philip Jackson

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. <hl> Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. <hl> Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by <hl> Philip Jackson <hl> and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.

question: Who made the Gurkha Monument?, context: The headquarters of the MoD are in Whitehall and are now known as Main Building. This structure is neoclassical in style and was originally built between 1938 and 1959 to designs by Vincent Harris to house the Air Ministry and the Board of Trade. The northern entrance in Horse Guards Avenue is flanked by two monumental statues, Earth and Water, by Charles Wheeler. Opposite stands the Gurkha Monument, sculpted by Philip Jackson and unveiled in 1997 by Queen Elizabeth II. Within it is the Victoria Cross and George Cross Memorial, and nearby are memorials to the Fleet Air Arm and RAF (to its east, facing the riverside). A major refurbishment of the building was completed under a PFI contract by Skanska in 2004.


Question: Who had a wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall?

Answer: Henry VIII

Henry VIII 's

<hl> Henry VIII 's <hl> wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

<hl> Henry VIII <hl>'s wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

question: Who had a wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall?, context: Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.


Question: Where is Henry VIII's wine cellar?

Answer: the basement of Main Building

<hl> Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building , and is used for entertainment. <hl> The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in <hl> the basement of Main Building <hl>, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in <hl> the basement of Main Building <hl> , and is used for entertainment.

question: Where is Henry VIII's wine cellar?, context: Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.


Question: When was the cellar in the basement of Main Building built?

Answer: 1514–1516

<hl> Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. <hl> The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in <hl> 1514–1516 <hl> for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

question: When was the cellar in the basement of Main Building built?, context: Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.


Question: What is the main material used to build the cellar in the basement of Main Building?

Answer: brick

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. <hl> The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. <hl> This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted <hl> brick <hl> structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

question: What is the main material used to build the cellar in the basement of Main Building?, context: Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.


Question: When was the cellar relocated?

Answer: 1949

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. <hl> The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949 , when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. <hl> This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in <hl> 1949 <hl>, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.

The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in <hl> 1949 <hl> , when construction was resumed at the site after World War II.

question: When was the cellar relocated?, context: Henry VIII's wine cellar at the Palace of Whitehall, built in 1514–1516 for Cardinal Wolsey, is in the basement of Main Building, and is used for entertainment. The entire vaulted brick structure of the cellar was encased in steel and concrete and relocated nine feet to the west and nearly 19 feet (5.8 m) deeper in 1949, when construction was resumed at the site after World War II. This was carried out without any significant damage to the structure.


Question: Who in the MoD was convicted of fraud?

Answer: Gordon Foxley

<hl> The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley , head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. <hl> Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

The most notable fraud conviction was that of <hl> Gordon Foxley <hl>, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

The most notable fraud conviction was that of <hl> Gordon Foxley <hl> , head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984.

question: Who in the MoD was convicted of fraud?, context: The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.


Question: What position was held by Foxley?

Answer: head of defence procurement

<hl> The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. <hl> Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, <hl> head of defence procurement <hl> at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

question: What position was held by Foxley?, context: The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.


Question: What years was Foxley employed by the MoD?

Answer: 1981 to 1984

<hl> The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984 . <hl> Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from <hl> 1981 to 1984 <hl>. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from <hl> 1981 to 1984 <hl> .

question: What years was Foxley employed by the MoD?, context: The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.


Question: How much money was Foxley accused of taking?

Answer: at least £3.5m

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. <hl> Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts. <hl>

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received <hl> at least £3.5m <hl> in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.

question: How much money was Foxley accused of taking?, context: The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.


Question: What do the police believe the bribes were intended to do?

Answer: influence the allocation of contracts

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. <hl> Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts . <hl>

The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to <hl> influence the allocation of contracts <hl>.

Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to <hl> influence the allocation of contracts <hl> .

question: What do the police believe the bribes were intended to do?, context: The most notable fraud conviction was that of Gordon Foxley, head of defence procurement at the Ministry of Defence from 1981 to 1984. Police claimed he received at least £3.5m in total in corrupt payments, such as substantial bribes from overseas arms contractors aiming to influence the allocation of contracts.


Question: What publication released a report about the Ministry of Defence in 2002?

Answer: the Guardian

<hl> A government report covered by the Guardian in 2002 indicates that between 1940 and 1979, the Ministry of Defence "turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public" and many of these tests "involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told." <hl> The Ministry of Defence claims that these trials were to simulate germ warfare and that the tests were harmless. Still, families who have been in the area of many of the tests are experiencing children with birth defects and physical and mental handicaps and many are asking for a public inquiry. According to the report these tests affected estimated millions of people including one period between 1961 and 1968 where "more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax." Two scientists commissioned by the Ministry of Defence stated that these trials posed no risk to the public. This was confirmed by Sue Ellison, a representative of Porton Down who said that the results from these trials "will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons." Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research." It is unknown whether or not the harmlessness of the trials was known at the time of their occurrence.

A government report covered by <hl> the Guardian <hl> in 2002 indicates that between 1940 and 1979, the Ministry of Defence "turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public" and many of these tests "involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told." The Ministry of Defence claims that these trials were to simulate germ warfare and that the tests were harmless. Still, families who have been in the area of many of the tests are experiencing children with birth defects and physical and mental handicaps and many are asking for a public inquiry. According to the report these tests affected estimated millions of people including one period between 1961 and 1968 where "more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax." Two scientists commissioned by the Ministry of Defence stated that these trials posed no risk to the public. This was confirmed by Sue Ellison, a representative of Porton Down who said that the results from these trials "will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons." Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research." It is unknown whether or not the harmlessness of the trials was known at the time of their occurrence.

question: What publication released a report about the Ministry of Defence in 2002?, context: A government report covered by the Guardian in 2002 indicates that between 1940 and 1979, the Ministry of Defence "turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public" and many of these tests "involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told." The Ministry of Defence claims that these trials were to simulate germ warfare and that the tests were harmless. Still, families who have been in the area of many of the tests are experiencing children with birth defects and physical and mental handicaps and many are asking for a public inquiry. According to the report these tests affected estimated millions of people including one period between 1961 and 1968 where "more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax." Two scientists commissioned by the Ministry of Defence stated that these trials posed no risk to the public. This was confirmed by Sue Ellison, a representative of Porton Down who said that the results from these trials "will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons." Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research." It is unknown whether or not the harmlessness of the trials was known at the time of their occurrence.


Question: What was the MoD accused of doing to the public?

Answer: secret germ warfare tests

<hl> A government report covered by the Guardian in 2002 indicates that between 1940 and 1979, the Ministry of Defence "turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public" and many of these tests "involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told." <hl> The Ministry of Defence claims that these trials were to simulate germ warfare and that the tests were harmless. Still, families who have been in the area of many of the tests are experiencing children with birth defects and physical and mental handicaps and many are asking for a public inquiry. According to the report these tests affected estimated millions of people including one period between 1961 and 1968 where "more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax." Two scientists commissioned by the Ministry of Defence stated that these trials posed no risk to the public. This was confirmed by Sue Ellison, a representative of Porton Down who said that the results from these trials "will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons." Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research." It is unknown whether or not the harmlessness of the trials was known at the time of their occurrence.

A government report covered by the Guardian in 2002 indicates that between 1940 and 1979, the Ministry of Defence "turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of <hl> secret germ warfare tests <hl> on the public" and many of these tests "involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told." The Ministry of Defence claims that these trials were to simulate germ warfare and that the tests were harmless. Still, families who have been in the area of many of the tests are experiencing children with birth defects and physical and mental handicaps and many are asking for a public inquiry. According to the report these tests affected estimated millions of people including one period between 1961 and 1968 where "more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax." Two scientists commissioned by the Ministry of Defence stated that these trials posed no risk to the public. This was confirmed by Sue Ellison, a representative of Porton Down who said that the results from these trials "will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons." Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research." It is unknown whether or not the harmlessness of the trials was known at the time of their occurrence.

question: What was the MoD accused of doing to the public?, context: A government report covered by the Guardian in 2002 indicates that between 1940 and 1979, the Ministry of Defence "turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public" and many of these tests "involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told." The Ministry of Defence claims that these trials were to simulate germ warfare and that the tests were harmless. Still, families who have been in the area of many of the tests are experiencing children with birth defects and physical and mental handicaps and many are asking for a public inquiry. According to the report these tests affected estimated millions of people including one period between 1961 and 1968 where "more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax." Two scientists commissioned by the Ministry of Defence stated that these trials posed no risk to the public. This was confirmed by Sue Ellison, a representative of Porton Down who said that the results from these trials "will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons." Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: "It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research." It is unknown whether or not the harmlessness of the trials was known at the time of their occurrence.