argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Supply Chains — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jamie Hume Stone (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I ask this question against the background of yesterday’s unthinkable dry run for a no-deal Brexit— 80 lorries is hardly the same as 6,000. I represent the furthest-away part of the UK mainland. I have mentioned before in the Chamber Mr William Calder, who runs a fish food company in Scrabster. Half a day’s extra delay in getting his fish products to the European market will ruin the gentleman. Does the Minister see just how dangerous the future could be for my constituents?
Universal Credit: Managed Migration — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Social Welfare
Jamie Hume Stone (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): When universal credit was initially rolled out some time ago, people living in the highlands were the unwitting guinea pigs in this experiment. Now that some of the flaws in universal credit are becoming apparent, is there not a case for financial compensation for these people for all they have undergone?
Universal Credit: Managed Migration — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Social Welfare
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I was delighted to hear the Minister say that he would listen to what is said about the changes that will have to be made. Does that mean that he will accept the necessity for a guarantee that vulnerable people on existing legacy benefits need not apply, that there will be some way of ensuring that they are being moved successfully on to universal credit before their legacy benefits are stopped, and that someone from the DWP will visit them at home to ensure that they are receiving what they are entitled to, and are completely aware of the changes?
Seaborne Freight — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Transportation
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The train timetable fiasco, the drone disruption, the Manston lorry park carry-on and, now, ferrygate—the Secretary of State is the embodiment of the Peter principle On the earlier point about competition, can the Secretary of State explain the "extreme urgency brought about by events unforeseeable by the contracting authority" Can he explain what was unforeseeable about no deal, for which the Government have been planning for the past couple of years and to which they have referred many, many times in this place? What was unforeseeable about that?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Transportation
John Vincent Cable (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Thank you for your indulgence, Mr Speaker. I just want to say a few words in support of amendments 7 and 8. They are Brexit-neutral, in the sense that they require the House to approve any change, but of course they relate primarily to no deal. The fiscal issues, as the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin) explained them, were arcane and rather gentle. I tabled a more brutal amendment that was not called In the 30 seconds left, I want to relate an incident from this morning, when I went to the ferry port at Portsmouth. It is very clear that the Government are totally and utterly unprepared for the chaotic impact that there will be on the road system, including access to the naval base, if a no-deal Brexit occurs. Despite repeated requests from the council and others, the Department for Transport and the Ministry of Defence are refusing to co-operate, and the police now say that the M3 motorway will have to be closed from Winchester to Basingstoke in order to provide a lorry park. Repeated efforts to get Ministers to respond have not been heeded. A meeting was held for 19 regional MPs last week, but only one attended, so I am taking on the job of representing a no-deal Brexit. It is a task I undertake with all the enthusiasm of an arsonist trying to put out a bushfire, but I will do it.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Macroeconomics
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I thank the hon. Member for St Albans (Mrs Main) for her passionate speech. I also thank the right hon. Member for Loughborough (Nicky Morgan), who chairs the Treasury Committee, and right hon. and hon. Members from across the House, who have campaigned as a Parliament against this measure and supported new clause 26. It is my wish to divide the House on the new clause if the Minister does not accept it Let me make it crystal clear from the start that I support the Treasury’s aim of closing tax loopholes and stopping tax avoidance. The introduction of loan charges in the Finance Act 2017 to stop future abuse was correct, and the review my new clause proposes would not seek to prevent the Treasury from stopping that abuse from the 2016 Budget announcement. Instead—somewhat inelegantly, due to the rules of Finance Bill debate—new clause 26 aims to focus the minds of Treasury Ministers on the gross unfairness of the way the 2017 Act went about closing an unacceptable tax loophole I believe that the review envisaged in the new clause would reveal the unfairness of the retrospective nature of the current loan charge legislation in two ways. First, it would show how that retrospective nature is even more severe than non-retrospective but backward-looking proceedings for the recovery of lost tax elsewhere in our tax legislation. Secondly, it would show that the test of reasonableness included in proposed new section 36A, if applied to the loan charge, would in fact prevent any retrospective tax collection from the loan charge Let me remind the House why the Treasury should, after the review, ditch the retrospective nature of this measure, delay April’s implementation and amend the charge so it focuses only on payments made after 2016. It is because the loan charge, as introduced, offends against the rule of law. It is the sort of taxation that led the barons to rebel against King John and gave birth to Magna Carta. It is simply not acceptable for a Government to introduce a law that makes illegal something someone did years ago, when that action was considered legal. That is a clear principle.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Macroeconomics
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The hon. Lady is absolutely right, and I thank her for her support. Let us remember that these people—our constituents—were given professional tax advice and behaved in a way they thought was right and lawful at the time.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Macroeconomics
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is right on all the points he makes. When my hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Stephen Lloyd) tabled the early-day motion that got cross-party support when this campaign was getting going, those were exactly the points he made. We all condemn tax avoidance and support the Treasury, but this retrospective approach to taxation is simply unacceptable.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Macroeconomics
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Indeed. HMRC knew about these tax schemes for years and took no action. They were widely used—as we have heard, right hon. and hon. Members from around the House have constituents affected—and widely advertised and yet were ignored by the tax authorities. People could only take some public sector positions if they agreed to be paid via these schemes, and it emerged ahead of the Westminster Hall debate that even some HMRC contractors were paid through such a scheme.
Rural Broadband — House of Commons, 2019-03-07
Topic: Technology
Alexander Morrison Carmichael (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I thank the Minister most warmly and sincerely for her announcement yesterday of £1.91 million to get superfast broadband into Unst and Yell in Shetland. That money truly has the potential to be transformative for those communities. If she would like to come and see that for herself, she would be very welcome. If she does so, she will also be able to see the remaining communities in Shetland and Orkney where such investment could make a massive difference.
Mobile Phone Coverage — House of Commons, 2019-03-07
Topic: Technology
Norman Peter Lamb (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): People living in part of North Walsham in my constituency have been waiting years for any signal at all. They thought their wait was over when a mast was erected in November 2017 but, despite constant pressure on BT Openreach, it still has not been connected. Openreach needs to lay cables across land owned by Anglian Water. Should we not be able to compel these monopolies to provide a service to local people?
Knife Crime — House of Commons, 2019-03-07
Topic: Law and Crime
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The Home Secretary has tried to use the threat of prison to stop young people carrying knives, and it clearly has not worked. I passionately disagree with the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes): short-term prison sentences do not work, and I include six-month sentences in that. Why are the Government creating more mandatory short-term prison sentences in the Offensive Weapons Bill, including for breaches of the new knife crime prevention orders?
Knife Crime — House of Commons, 2019-03-07
Topic: Law and Crime
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): May I bring the Minister back to the matter of school exclusions, and encourage her to talk to the Department for Education about adopting an assumption that there should be zero school exclusions, as advocated by my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) and Siobhan Benita, the Lib Dem mayoral candidate in London? Does the Minister understand concerns over the borough command unit mergers that have seen Sutton, Croydon and Bromley merge, and the risk that a one-size-fits-all approach will be adopted in relation to knife crime when what is really needed is a targeted borough or ward-based approach?
Kashmir — House of Commons, 2019-03-07
Topic: International Affairs
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I join the unanimous condemnation of these callous terrorist attacks and underline, as I think the Minister would, that the matter of Kashmir will be resolved only when India and Pakistan put the interests of Kashmiris centre stage I was hoping the Minister would clarify one point in relation to his statement. He referred to the fact that Pakistan’s actions need to be "urgent, sustained, credible and transparent", but it is not clear to me whether he believes that to be the case, so will he confirm that? Will he also confirm what further action the UK Government may be able to take with Pakistan in future on tackling terrorism?
Security Agreements: European Union — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: Law and Crime
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Further to the question asked by the right hon. Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper), the police have said that direct access to EU databases such as SIS II are mission critical for their work in tackling criminals and terrorists. What guarantee can the Home Secretary give the House today that, after the transition period, Britain and the police will still have access to these mission-critical databases?
Immigration Detention Estate — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: Labor
Questions: What recent assessment he has made of the size of the (a) current and (b) future immigration detention estate; and if he will make a statement.
Layla Michelle Moran (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I welcome very much the closure of Campsfield House; I have been campaigning for its closure for a very long time. However, it happened very quickly, so lots of workers are now worried about where they will find a job. The local community is desperate to know the plans for the site once Campsfield is totally run down.
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: International Affairs
Joanne Kate Swinson (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I cannot believe in good conscience, knowing what the Prime Minister does about the devastating impact of no deal on our economy and on our security, that she is willing to let us leave the EU on that basis, yet she seems wedded to her red lines and still against a people’s vote, which would have majority support if she backed it. With 67 days to go, the country deserves better than a massive game of chicken in the Tory party. When will the Prime Minister recognise she needs to move?
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: International Affairs
Jamie Hume Stone (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I am sure my views on this matter are well known to the House, so I choose my words with care. A week ago, I asked the Prime Minister what, in the event of the UK leaving the EU, Government fund would replace the European structural funds that have been such a benefit to the highlands for many years. In her answer, she said "the shared prosperity fund". Will the Prime Minister give me an assurance today that the shared prosperity fund will find its way to the needy highlands and islands and not be—how shall I put it?—creamed off for cherished projects in the south of Scotland or near Edinburgh or Glasgow?
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: International Affairs
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The Prime Minister said earlier that extending article 50 would just be deferring the moment of decision, but does she not agree that in the current situation, when there is no consensus in the House, it is very difficult to know what the will of the people is now, two and a half years down the road and amid this chaos, lack of leadership and indecision? Perhaps deferring the moment of decision is exactly what we need, so she should consider extending article 50.
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: International Affairs
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Why does the Prime Minister continue to claim that the only way to rule out no deal is either to vote for her deal or to revoke article 50? She knows that that is not the case. A third way is to put her deal to the people in a people’s vote and let them choose between her deal and staying in the European Union. Why will she not admit that?
Northern Ireland: Security Situation — House of Commons, 2019-01-21
Topic: Law and Crime
Alexander Morrison Carmichael (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I, too, thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement. This incident is of a sort that we all hoped belonged in the past but, in truth, those of us who are briefed regularly by police and security services in Northern Ireland have long known that this was not just possible but likely. The men of violence only have to get lucky once. This, though, should be an opportunity to turn a negative into a positive. It should be the moment when all parties of Northern Ireland understand the importance of giving a democratic response to a provocation of violence. This is why it is important that we have all the democratic institutions in Northern Ireland functioning. Will she inject fresh impetus to that process, if necessary bringing in an outside mediator to get things moving?
Universal Credit: Transition — House of Commons, 2019-01-07
Topic: Social Welfare
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. I welcome reports that she is considering scaling back the roll-out of the migration to universal credit for those on legacy benefits while problems with the system are identified and resolved. However, we have seen from the WASPI—Women Against State Pension Inequality—scandal that a letter from the Department is often not enough to stop even those who are not vulnerable from falling through the cracks. Why has the Secretary of State rejected the recommendation from her own social security advisory committee that legacy benefits claimants should be transferred to universal credit automatically? As a minimum, will she guarantee that nobody has their legacy benefits stopped without an application?
Universal Credit: Household Incomes — House of Commons, 2019-01-07
Topic: Social Welfare
Joanne Kate Swinson (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I hope that the delay to the full roll-out of universal credit is a sign that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is open to making the many changes to universal credit that are needed. I urge Minister to look in particular at the harsh repayment timescales for loans, which led my constituent to say: "I should never have taken that 3 month job. It made me worse off" Surely that is the very opposite of what the Government are trying to achieve with universal credit.
EU Withdrawal Agreement: Legal Changes — House of Commons, 2019-01-07
Topic: International Affairs
John Vincent Cable (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The Leader of the Opposition clarified, over the recess, that in the event that the Labour party obtains and wins a general election it will proceed with Brexit, so what are the Minister’s civil service advisers telling it that is in any way different from what the Government are doing?
EU Withdrawal Agreement: Legal Changes — House of Commons, 2019-01-07
Topic: Foreign Trade
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I wish you, Mr Speaker, and all Members of the House a happy new year One of our most distinguished ex-civil servants, Lord Macpherson, estimated this morning that the earliest time by which a comprehensive trade agreement with the EU could be reached would be 2025—that is, two years of transition and then five years of a backstop. If the Secretary of State does not agree with that estimate, why not?
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe — House of Commons, 2019-01-07
Topic: International Affairs
Joanne Kate Swinson (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The case of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is heartbreaking: the separation of a mother from her young child and now this dreadful escalation in the reduction of food rations and the denial of medical treatment. Sadly, Iran has form when it comes to the cruel practice of preventing medical attention. In 2017, one political prisoner died and another lost part of his face because of untreated cancers. What discussions has the Minister had with his counterparts in other countries, including those with slightly warmer relations with Iran, about how we can present a united front in raising this case and others like it?
Drones: Consultation Response — House of Commons, 2019-01-07
Topic: Transportation
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I was one of those tens of thousands of people whose journey was disrupted that day. After the initial relief that it had been rearranged in such an orderly way for me to get home to Edinburgh, which also had to cope with the knock-on effect, I was aghast that one of our major airports could be so vulnerable and that it took so long to get it back in play. That is an issue which, with respect, the Secretary of State will have to pay attention to and address. He said a few minutes ago that these incidents are few and far between, but, with respect, it would take only one to create a catastrophe and there has been an undermining of public confidence in the safety at our airports. Will he bring forward some report, some work to reassure the public, and, without in any way undermining security, detail how our passengers will be protected in our airports?
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Transportation
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Is the hon. Gentleman aware that according to reports what those lorries were mostly doing was sitting stationary while the drivers were drinking cups of coffee, so I am not sure the Secretary of State will have learned too much from that?
Crime (Overseas Production Orders) Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2019-01-30
Topic: Law and Crime
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I hope the Minister recognises that all Members on both sides of the House want to find ways of sharing data so that we can go after these wicked people who abuse children. Will he therefore tell us what efforts have been made, in discussions with our American friends, to find a treaty that deals with those crimes and others but stops short of those crimes that could result in the death penalty? What efforts have been made to carve out those crimes so that they could be dealt with in a second treaty?
Crime (Overseas Production Orders) Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2019-01-30
Topic: Law and Crime
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I repeat that the case the Minister is making is supported on both sides of the House. I very much doubt that there will be a Division on Third Reading—certainly we on these Benches will be supporting the Bill at that time—so he does not need to make this case, because we all support him. The issue of this debate on new clause 1 and other alternatives is whether we can achieve the goals on which we all agree while also finding a way to implement existing Government policy on death penalty assurances. The Minister is recognised for working across the House—that is why he is held in such high regard—but it is our right to scrutinise legislation in this place, and in this debate we want to tease out whether we can find a way, through the treaties or through the Bill, to get those death penalty assurances that I am sure he also wants.
Crime (Overseas Production Orders) Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2019-01-30
Topic: Law and Crime
Edward Jonathon Davey (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The Minister is being generous in giving way. I repeat that, as he knows, both sides of the House want exactly what he has just described. However, this House’s job is to scrutinise and ensure that legislation is being done in the right way so that other parts of Government policy are also upheld. He said in response to the right hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve), a former Attorney General, that we should not worry about this because ECHR obligations, which he read out in some detail, would prevent Ministers from not complying with this policy. Will the Minister elaborate on that for the benefit the House? When the Home Secretary recently did not seek death penalty assurances, was that decision in line with our convention obligations?
Work Capability Assessments — House of Commons, 2019-02-11
Topic: Law and Crime
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I thank the Minister for her reply and for giving me time to recover my breath. As a constituency MP, I am sure that she, like me and many others, will know many constituents who feel that they have been ignored, bullied or interrogated during WCAs. Given that in the past the Ministry of Justice has had to spend some £100 million in arguing court cases and appeals, will she at least undertake to examine whether the public sector is not in fact better placed to carry out these assessments than private contractors, who have a very poor reputation?
Seaborne Freight — House of Commons, 2019-02-11
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the cancellation of a contract with Seaborne Freight as part of the Government’s contingency planning for a no-deal Brexit.
Thomas Anthony Brake (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): What will it take for this Secretary of State to get the sack? Let me see if the following would cause the Prime Minister to issue him his P45: breaking EU procurement rules. Does the Secretary of State really believe he can claim no deal is an emergency that came to light only in October? If it did, it is his fault for underestimating the disruption caused at the ports. Is he confident that this argument is going to stand up in court?