Tag: Roger Godsiff

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-10-10.

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the Gulf Strategy Unit’s remit is; and which Government Minister set that remit.

Ben Gummer

The Gulf Strategy Integrated Delivery Team was established in 2015.

Its remit is to coordinate the Government’s strategic approach to UK engagement with the Gulf States as set out in the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015.

It employs three full-time and one part-time Government employees. One is military and three are civilian.

Administration costs were £70,004 in the 2015-16 financial year and the budget for administration costs in the 2016-17 financial year is £423,000. The 2015-16 figure reflects the fact the unit was established later in the financial year.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-10-20.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many times his Department did not select or treated as ineligible a contractor under article 23 of the Defence and Security Public Contract Regulations 2011 since 2011.

Harriett Baldwin

The Ministry of Defence is not aware of any instances where it has not selected, or treated as ineligible, a contractor under article 23 of the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to the Answer of 16 September 2015 to Question 9671, for what reasons the Government cannot mandate companies to join the 2013 Accord on Fire and Safety in Bangladesh.

Mr Desmond Swayne

The Rana Plaza disaster demonstrated the need for a concerted effort by all stakeholders to address the challenges facing the garments industry in Bangladesh. As well as establishing 2 international initiatives (the Accord and the Alliance), The International Labour Organisation (ILO) worked with the Government of Bangladesh (GoB), employer organisations, and trade union representatives to develop the Tripartite National Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity (NTPA) and in 2014 the Government raised the minimum wage for the country’s garment workers by 77%.

The Accord has been established as a voluntary, independent, legally binding agreement between Trade Unions and brands: we, and the many stakeholders involved, believe this is a more effective mechanism than making it mandatory. We actively encourage UK companies to join the Accord.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to the Answer of 16 September 2015 to Question 9671, what estimate the Government has made of the proportion of UK companies which have joined the 2013 Accord on Fire and Safety in Bangladesh.

Mr Desmond Swayne

30 UK companies have signed the 2013 Accord on Fire and Safety in Bangladesh. We do not have comprehensive information on the total number of UK brands purchasing Garments from Bangladesh.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 16 October 2015 to Question 11269, whether a personal independence payment assessment provider would be breaking the terms of its contract with his Department if it were to provide audio equipment for use in assessments which complied with the required specifications.

Justin Tomlinson

There is no contractual agreement between DWP and assessment providers around the provision of audio equipment. If claimants wish for their assessments to be recorded they may do so using their own equipment, provided they comply with the conditions put in place which were outlined in the response provided to your previous question on this subject on 9 September 2015 and 16^th of October 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-16.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the parliamentary communications of the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hall Green; and whether that hon. Member has been subject to surveillance.

Mr John Hayes

The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.

As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.

The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.

It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-16.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 14 October 2015 to Question 11270, for what reason it was decided to make the provision of audio recording facilities available for employment and support allowance assessments but not for personal independence payment assessments.

Justin Tomlinson

In his first review of the Work Capability Assessment, Professor Harrington recommended piloting the audio recording of face-to-face assessments to see if the approach was helpful for clients and improved quality.

Findings from the pilot showed that recording assessments did not improve the quality of assessments. Less than half those claimants taking part thought the recording would be helpful to them and only a handful requested a copy. Having carefully considered the results of the pilot, it was decided not to make the provision of audio recording of assessments a contractual requirement within the specification for Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

However, claimants who wish to record their PIP assessment may do so using their own equipment provided they comply with the conditions put in place; these were outlined in the response provided to your previous question on this subject on 9 September 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-15.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what information he received about risks connected with the proposed right to buy scheme during the planning of that scheme.

Brandon Lewis

The Government has a manifesto commitment to extend the Right to Buy to 1.3 million housing association tenants.

The deal we have made with the National Housing Federation ensures that housing associations will give their tenants the opportunity to buy their home with an equivalent discount to the Right to Buy, delivering the manifesto commitment.

The Government is in discussion with the National Housing Federation and the housing association sector to ensure that the right arrangements are put in place to support the implementation and delivery of the proposals.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-09.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department plans to tender for additional proton beam therapy treatment providers.

Jane Ellison

The decision to commission services from additional proton beam therapy (PBT) centres would likely be triggered by an existing supplier no longer being able to deliver services and/or NHS England having capacity requirements that could not be met by the existing providers.

In the event NHS England required additional PBT providers, these would be selected through a procurement exercise.

There is currently no indication that NHS England will need to seek additional providers but it will, of course, keep this position under review.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-09.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what forecasts his Department has made of the proportion of NHS (a) nurses and (b) doctors that will be recruited from agencies in each of the next five years.

Ben Gummer

The information requested is not held by the Department.