Armed Forces: Health Professions

Ministry of Defence written question – answered on 21st October 2021.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of John Healey John Healey Shadow Secretary of State for Defence

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many medical and dental professionals were employed by the (a) British Army, (b) Royal Navy and (c) RAF in each year since 2015.

Photo of Leo Docherty Leo Docherty Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (jointly with the Ministry of Defence)

For the years requested, the tables below provide the number of trained and trade trained (Army) Medical and Dental Officers in the UK Regular Armed Forces.

Medical Officers

1 April 2015

1 April 2016

1 April 2017

1 April 2018

1 April 2019

1 April 2020

1 April 2021

Royal Navy/Royal Marines

260

250

260

260

290

280

280

Army

560

540

560

540

520

550

560

RAF

230

200

210

200

210

200

210

Dental Officers

1 April 2015

1 April 2016

1 April 2017

1 April 2018

1 April 2019

1 April 2020

1 April 2021

Royal Navy/Royal Marines

50

50

40

40

40

40

40

Army

110

100

100

100

90

90

80

RAF

40

40

40

40

30

30

30

UK Regulars are full-time Service personnel, including Nursing Services, excluding Full Time Reserve Service personnel, Gurkhas, mobilised Reservists, Military Provost Guarding Service, Locally Engaged Personnel, and Non-Regular Permanent Service. Figures are comprised of Medical Officers and Dental Officers. They do not include Nursing Officers or Other Ranks in medical or dental trades.

Trained strength comprises military personnel who have completed Phase 1 and 2 training for Royal Navy/Royal Marines and the RAF. Following the change in definition of trained strength for the Army, from 1 October 2016, trained strength for the Army comprises of personnel who have completed Phase 1 training. Trade trained strength relates to the Army only and includes personnel who have passed Phase 2 training.

Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10, though numbers ending in a 5 have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent the systematic bias caused by always rounding numbers upwards.

Does this answer the above question?

Yes0 people think so

No1 person thinks not

Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.