argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): The right hon. Lady is right in every aspect. In the closing stages of the negotiations, we should be striving to bridge the outstanding gaps and secure a good deal. She is also right to say that there will be two components—the withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship—and it is right to say that during the implementation period we will need to turn that into a binding treaty. One of the areas in which we have made progress, which was not touched on by other Labour Members, is the agreement in principle that we are pursuing to have linkage so that the withdrawal agreement requires us all to proceed in good faith to that future relationship. That is important when we talk about not having a deal until we have the whole deal. Yes, there are different aspects of the package, but the deal has to be viewed in the round and in a balanced way.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): I am going to leave the question of passport queues to the Home Secretary. I will say, however, that the hon. Gentleman is right to point out, in relation to the deal and no deal planning, that in order to get the right outcome we will need collaboration and goodwill, which I am confident we will get from the EU side. That is why we are continuing these negotiations. Even in a no deal scenario, in relation to the default arrangements that would apply, we would want to keep co-operating and communicating to ensure that we minimise any disruption.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Richard Michael John Ogilvie Graham (Conservative, Centre-right): As well as highlighting European Commission concerns over our trade and customs proposals, Michel Barnier made it clear in the meeting with the Exiting the European Union Committee yesterday that he also welcomed much of what was in the White Paper, and he emphasised above all that his mission, like that of the Secretary of State, is to achieve a deal. Given the uncertainties of the world in which we live, surely that is even more important than ever. Since the shadow Minister is so determined to avoid a no deal, a position which many of us would share, does my right hon. Friend share my belief that it is astonishing that the Labour party has not come out more fully in support of the Government’s attempts to achieve a successful end to the negotiations with the EU?
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In fairness, it is not just that the Labour party has not come out in support of our proposals; it has not come out in support of any proposals. It is sitting on the fence trying to work out which way the wind is blowing As for Michel Barnier’s comments, on Friday he publicly reported good progress on the outstanding separation issues. On law enforcement co-operation, he said that "we now have the elements to build a close and effective relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom". On external security, he described "a large convergence of views on… future cooperation".
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): We are absolutely clear that we want to ensure that we get a good deal for all quarters of the UK. I have been clear, and was again today, that a no deal scenario certainly has risks, which is why it is not our preferred outcome. Our overriding priority is a good deal for the UK and the EU, but we need to be prepared for all eventualities and to be able to manage the short-term disruption. Irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations, I am confident that Britain can go from strength to strength.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Foreign Trade
Robert James MacGillivray Neill (Conservative, Centre-right): Eighty per cent. of the UK’s economy is services. Chequers of course does not deal with services, but it would at least buy time for a proper negotiation to achieve the Government’s plans, especially for financial services given the automatic loss of passporting rights if we leave without any interim arrangements. Has the Secretary of State quantified what the costs will be to the British financial services sector of leaving in a no deal scenario with the automatic loss of the passporting rights that allow British firms into the EU’s financial services market?
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): The right hon. Gentleman is an experienced campaigner and knows a lot about such issues and about negotiations, so I am sure that he will recognise that he and others are going to be used in a pressure exercise on the UK Government in the final phase of the negotiations. We are in a direct negotiation with Michel Barnier and the EU as a whole, and we will continue to pursue the proposals that we set out in the White Paper. We are confident that we can get a good deal.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the nature of the financial settlement, as set out in the withdrawal agreement, is contingent upon us agreeing the deal as a whole, and it could not be guaranteed that we would provide the same amount of money if we left the EU without a deal. We will abide by our legal obligations, but I think my hon. Friend can safely say that that would be open for consideration.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy John Elton Lefroy (Conservative, Centre-right): Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I thank my right hon. Friend, his colleagues and their teams for the huge amount of work they have done over the past couple of months in making a great deal of progress, as was quite evident last week and, indeed, in the Exiting the European Union Committee’s meeting with Mr Barnier yesterday? However, while I understand that the idea of coming away from all this with no deal must be put out there, it cannot be contemplated with any degree of equanimity. It would be seen by the world as a failure on our part and that of the European Union. It is not acceptable.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank my hon. Friend for paying tribute to the excellent work being done at DExEU by our team of civil servants and across Whitehall. A huge amount of work is going on. I agree with his basic point that no deal would represent the worst-case scenario and the worst outcome from the negotiations. The best-case scenario and the optimum solution that we are aiming for is a good deal. I also agree that the approach to the Brexit negotiations will be defining both for the UK and the EU.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): In that sector, as in all others, we want to ensure that we have the strongest possible relationship with our EU partners, and she will be familiar with the proposals in that area from the White Paper. Of course, as for no deal contingency planning, the technical notices will cover this area, as they do for many others, but we are striving for the strongest deal possible, and that ought to give her confidence about jobs, co-operation and all the other areas in which she takes a close interest.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Foreign Trade
Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax (Conservative, Centre-right): We hear much about the Chequers deal, but less about the common rulebook. Were it to be adopted, will my right hon. Friend assure me and the House that it will not in any way, shape or form affect future trade deals with countries outside the EU?
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Foreign Trade
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): The key thing in relation to the common rulebook is that it cannot be said that it would have no effect on our freedom and our latitude in free trade negotiations—that would not be an honest answer to my hon. Friend—but because, as a result of our proposals, we will have virtually full control over regulatory aspects of services and full control over tariffs, we will be in a strong position not just to continue the frictionless trade we want with our EU friends but to strike out around the world with the growth markets of the future from Latin America to Asia.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): I worked in dispute resolution before entering politics and, in almost any negotiation, pushback will be heard from one interlocutor or another at various points that is ultimately not reflected in the final deal. It might be stating the obvious, but negotiation is about working through objections and resistance On support from member states, Angela Merkel said on 10 July that we have made good progress and that it is a good thing we have these proposals on the table. The Irish Taoiseach said: "The Chequers statement is welcome. I believe it can input into the talks on the future relationship." We have also had the statements I described from the Latvian Foreign Minister, the Danish Finance Minister and the Polish Foreign Minister.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. We are absolutely committed to the devolved Administrations having the fullest possible consultation, engagement and influence on the negotiations as they proceed. We need to bear in mind the imperative of making sure that as much of that as possible takes place within the hard boundaries of the time pressure we are under, which of course results from article 50 rather than being a timetable of our choosing.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman has a long track record and long experience in this area. We have made sure that we are engaging not only with all the affected overseas territories but with the affected capitals, such as Madrid, to make sure that we have as much continuity and stability as possible for the people of this country and of our overseas territories.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Agriculture
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): My immediate concern is for the welfare of UK fishermen and women. There are intensive negotiations between London and other capitals to make sure that we have a responsible approach to those recent issues. On the Brexit negotiations, the hon. Gentleman will know that our White Paper proposals envisage us becoming an independent coastal state. We will want to continue co-operating with our EU partners in this sort of area, but we will have all the rights and advantages that come with being an independent coastal state under international law.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): As I have made clear, our overriding priority is to get a good deal. That is our top priority, and we are overridingly focused on that. There will be risks in a no deal scenario, and I have set out the plans for managing those risks, but it is worth bearing in mind that there are some countervailing opportunities.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Foreign Trade
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): I am not sure where the hon. Gentleman was, but I set them out in my statement. They include regulatory control and border control, and of course we would be able to move more swiftly not just to negotiate but to bring free trade deals into effect.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): As the hon. Gentleman will know, our White Paper includes proposals for continued co-operation and stability in this area. There is no deal until there is a whole deal, and although my thoughts and ambitions are with him and with his constituents on this point, I am afraid that I will not give out snippets from the negotiation room. The reality is that we need to present the package as a whole when we have negotiated it, so that people can see it in a balanced and rounded way.
Brexit Negotiations and No Deal Contingency Planning — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: International Affairs
Dominic Rennie Raab (Conservative, Centre-right): I cannot talk about any specific individual contracts, but I can tell the hon. Gentleman that in life sciences, as across those other areas we prize highly, we have a set of proposals—he will know them from the White Paper, but if he does not, I urge him to look at them—that will make sure we continue our strong co-operation and regulatory co-operation in that regard. In the event of no deal—of course we cannot force the EU to sign a deal; it has to be consensual and something both sides agree—we will have the technical notices, so that the guidance, the regulation and the team are in place to make sure we have as smooth a Brexit as possible in the circumstances.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes, I do share my right hon. Friend’s concerns. For many people, a car is not a luxury but is essential. The cost of insurance, particularly for young people, can be considerable. Indeed, as I will set out, that cost is likely to increase very significantly if we do not take action, which is one reason we have taken the measures that we have.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is right to raise both points. I come back to the fact that the CMA looked at this area and concluded that this is a competitive one. The history suggests that these benefits are passed on, but we are strengthening the Bill and will bring forward amendments very shortly that will enable us all to hold those insurance companies to account Many claims involving road traffic accidents will, of course, be genuine. It is absolutely right that they are compensated appropriately. Our reforms are focused on ensuring that genuine claimants have access to justice, receive a proportionate amount of compensation and that the system works for all who use it honestly. However, with major improvements in motoring safety in recent years, including the increased use of integrated seat and head restraints, it would be remiss of the Government not to ask what is going wrong. The reality is that some of these claims are not genuine. In 2017, the insurance industry identified almost 70,000 motor insurance claims that it considered to be fraudulent. As the learned Lord Hope of Craighead noted in the other place, it is necessary to do something to try to minimise the abuse that has given rise to such a large and disproportionate number of claims. The knock-on effect of all these claims is increased insurance premiums, particularly for young people and the elderly. As Members across the House will know, for many people, owning a car is not a luxury, but a necessity. That is especially true of those in rural communities, but it does affect all our constituents. That is why we have pledged in our manifesto to tackle these costs. Taken together, the whiplash measures proposed by the Government could result in savings of around £1.1 billion a year Around 85% of the UK motor and liability insurance market have publicly committed to pass on those savings to consumers. The Government intend to hold insurance companies to account by bringing forward an amendment, as I have said, to introduce an effective means for reporting on both the savings made and how they are passed on The purpose of our reforms is to compensate the genuinely injured and to improve the system for all by reducing the number and cost of whiplash claims and deterring fraudulent and unmeritorious claims. The measures in the Bill will do that by introducing a ban on settling whiplash claims without medical evidence. That will discourage fraud and incentivise insurers to investigate claims and provide reassurance to claimants that they are being compensated for the true extent of their injuries.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): They will be face-to-face medical examinations, which I believe will provide the degree of robustness in the system that we need The Bill will also provide for a new fixed tariff of compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity for whiplash claims. The high number of whiplash claims and compensation levels that we are seeing justifies that tariff being set by the Lord Chancellor. We want fair and proportionate compensation. Its cost should not be unfair to the motorists. We will provide some important flexibilities on how the tariff operates to make sure that it remains fair and adaptable where necessary to exceptional circumstances, inflation and changes in the claims market.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): This must be put in the context of a package of measures we are taking that seek to address the significant problem that exists, which I have sought to sketch out and which other hon. Members have highlighted: the very considerable cost that motorists face in insurance premiums as a consequence of whiplash claims, a number of which are clearly not genuine. Given that the number of road traffic accidents is falling yet the number of claims is going up, it is right that we take action.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Law and Crime
Victoria Grace Ford (Conservative, Centre-right): Four years ago, my family and I had a large car crash. Ever since then, I have been pestered, almost continually, by unwanted phone calls from people trying to encourage me to fraudulently claim for whiplash. Will this Bill stop that?
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): I want to make some progress I am aware that there has been concern on both sides of the House about the inclusion of vulnerable road users—for example, cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists —in the proposed small claims track rise. I am grateful to Members for signalling in their arguments how such road users may be disproportionately affected by this measure.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
Robert James MacGillivray Neill (Conservative, Centre-right): I am very grateful to hear the Secretary of State say that, because this issue was flagged up by the Select Committee on Justice in our report. If he is going to say that it is his intention to exclude those vulnerable road users from the Bill, that would be a most welcome recognition by the Government of the evidence on the matter.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Social Welfare
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): Very much so. It remains our objective to ensure that people are properly compensated—that they get the right level of compensation. The current process systematically overcompensates, and it is right that we address that because that compensation could be spent on frontline services. I am sure that that is what we would all want to do.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes, it is a decision taken by the Lord Chancellor. I was in the Treasury at the time when the most recent change to the discount rate was made by one of my predecessors, and I can certainly assure my hon. Friend that it was very much a decision taken by the Lord Chancellor. [Laughter.] Perhaps I should leave it there.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Law and Crime
Jonathan Simon Djanogly (Conservative, Centre-right): One of the key elements of stopping whiplash claims and so forth was the banning of referral fees. There are more and more reports coming in that, perhaps for the resilience reasons that my right hon. Friend discussed, we are increasingly seeing ways of getting round the ban on referral fees. This is of great concern to many. These people are of course breaking the law. Has he considered this situation?
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Law and Crime
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): Of course we continue to look at this area. It is worth pointing out not just what we are doing in this Bill but the measures and action taken in the context of the Financial Guidance and Claims Act 2018, and it is right that we continue to do so. As I say, the Government are determined to find out whether the use of PPOs can be increased. We are very pleased that the Civil Justice Council, which is chaired by the Master of the Rolls, has agreed in principle to consider this issue The Civil Liability Bill is an important piece of our wider work to reform the civil justice system, including through the Financial Guidance and Claims Act, which strengthens the regulatory regime for claims management companies and bans cold calling. These reforms are needed to put personal injury payments on a fair, more certain and sustainable footing for the future. In turn, they will save the NHS and consumers money.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Transportation
Huw William Merriman (Conservative, Centre-right): I recognise that the Opposition’s job is to oppose, but would the hon. Gentleman not concede that in the past decade the number of claims in this area has gone up by 40%, whereas cars have become safer and accidents have decreased by 31%? Surely, therefore, does it not make sense that this exploitation comes to an end to benefit his constituents, as policyholders, as well as mine?
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-09-04
Topic: Law and Crime
Chris Ian Brian Mynott Philp (Conservative, Centre-right): Is it not a well-established principle both in this country and overseas, in jurisdictions such as France, that for very straightforward, simple matters—these very minor injuries are generally straightforward and simple—having a fast-track process without the involvement of expensive lawyers is a reasonable and legitimate approach?