argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2016-03-02
Topic: Social Welfare
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): The proposal to cut the incomes of people on ESA WRAG by £1,500 is one of the most mean-spirited yet from this Government. The fact that the cut applies only to new claimants, in a little over a year’s time, demonstrates the unease Ministers have about it and their hope—a vain one—that because it applies only to new claimants, somehow people will not notice. The fact is that Ministers are looking for large savings at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable. That was not made clear in the general election campaign; then, the Prime Minister said that disabled people would be protected The Minister said that she was going to spend another £100 million on supporting these people. If her scheme was going to work, she would not need to cut this £30 from such people’s weekly income, because she would get the savings as they all moved into work. This is doomed to fail and the Minister knows it. If she was convinced that it was going to work, she would do the impact assessment, because she would be confident of the upshot. She is not doing so, and she is ignoring the very real impact that this will have on the health of the most vulnerable of our fellow citizens.
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2016-03-02
Topic: Social Welfare
Barry Strachan Gardiner (Labour, Centre-left): The cuts to employment and support allowance will make the lives of disabled people harder, the lives of those with mental, cognitive and behavioural difficulties harder, and the lives of those with progressive or fluctuating conditions harder. There are 9,290 people in receipt of employment and support allowance in my borough, Brent. In 2012 one of my constituents was placed in the WRAG group, fit to work—
Dog Theft: Sentencing — House of Commons, 2016-03-02
Topic: Law and Crime
Christopher James Evans (Labour, Centre-left): I apologise for coming late to the debate. I was caught out by the previous Division. The hon. Gentleman mentions the emotional impact of the theft of a dog. That is so important. For those of us who love dogs and have owned them all their lives, we know how terrible it is when we have to say goodbye to them. It is terrible to lose a dog in circumstances where we do not know what has happened, whether stolen by a criminal gang to be used for fighting or whatever. Does he agree that the emotional impact should be reflected in sentences for people who steal dogs?
Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Ann Coffey (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for his reply. Deprivation of liberty assessments are costing Stockport Council £1.2 million this year, as a result of the Cheshire West judgment. Not one single penny of that is providing social care. This is clearly unsustainable at a time when social care budgets are under intense pressure. Something needs to be done now; we cannot wait for the Law Commission. Will the Minister consider, as a small step forward, scrapping costly automatic annual reassessments and the necessity to reassess every time an elderly person leaves a care home to go into hospital?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Have there been any discussions between you and the Government about a possible statement on the terrible events unfolding in Brussels? Of course, we do not yet know the final facts, but a number of innocent people have been killed. We do not yet know whether there are any British victims, but there will be many families anxious to find news of relatives. I am sure that those on both sides of the House would welcome the opportunity to question the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary about the ongoing efforts of the police and security services here to protect the public in the UK from similar attacks.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Environment
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On Friday, the Government were taken to the Supreme Court by ClientEarth for failing to meet EU air quality standards which have resulted in 40,000 deaths a year at a cost of £20 billion a year. Are you aware of any statement that will be made by the Government on this important issue, particularly in the light of what is happening in the Budget? They have an opportunity to stop people dying and becoming disabled, rather than charging people for being disabled.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Labor
Iain David Wright (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. May I seek your advice and guidance on a matter of principle for this House? Select Committees have the power through this House to send for persons, papers and records, to enable them to obtain oral and written evidence to allow them to undertake their work. In keeping with this long-established power, the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee, which I chair, has sought to take evidence from the owner of Sports Direct, Mr Mike Ashley, on the treatment of workers at his company. That was in response to reports that workers at Mr Ashley’s warehouse in Shirebrook were not being paid the minimum wage. I have received correspondence from workers at Sports Direct, who have told me of practices such as employees being made to clock out but having to continue to work so that wages were not over budget; of staff kept for an hour after their scheduled finish time without pay to tidy shops; and of workers finishing work at 5 am and being required back at work two hours later We on the Select Committee naturally and not unreasonably wish to question Mr Ashley on the review of working conditions at his company that he announced he would undertake personally. After his refusal to accept our initial invitation to attend on a mutually convenient date, last week the Committee formally ordered Mr Ashley to attend on 7 June. Yesterday he indicated to the press, although not to the Committee, that he has no current intention of attending the Committee. He referred to the order to attend as "an abuse of the parliamentary process" and described the Committee as "a joke". I do not think that scrutinising reports of Victorian-type employment conditions in modern-day Britain is a joke Can you confirm, Mr Speaker, that the Committee has acted in accordance with the procedures of this House? Can you advise me what steps can now be taken to ensure that Mr Ashley complies with the very reasonable request, and then the formal order, of the BIS Committee?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Chancellor for giving way. It is less than a week since he stood up to deliver the Budget and made that decision affecting disability independence payments—something that upset many hundreds of thousands of people across this country. He has made a welcome U-turn, but should not he now acknowledge that that decision was a mistake that he should say sorry for?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor boasted when he opened the debate that this was the first time a Chancellor had opened the final day of a Budget debate. He will know that that is because it is also the first time a Chancellor has had to drop the biggest revenue raiser in his Budget within two days of announcing it. The former Work and Pensions Secretary, who has just resigned and to whom the Chancellor paid great tribute, described the Budget as "deeply unfair" and "drifting" in a wrong direction that will divide the country, not unite it. He said all those words after the Chancellor announced that he was ditching the PIP cuts. Is the former Work and Pensions Secretary deluded?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor did not address the issue of the unfairness of his Budget, so will he address the issue of the revenue behind his Budget? He has abandoned £4.4 billion in revenue raisers from his Budget. Where is that money going to come from, or will he change the scorecard that he set out?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Rachel Jane Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): The new Secretary of State for Work and Pensions said yesterday, in his first statement, that the Government would not be making any further cuts to welfare during this Parliament, but later on he said that there were "no plans" to make further cuts to welfare during this Parliament. Will the Chancellor now confirm, for the sake of disabled people and others, that there will be no further cuts to the welfare budget in this Parliament?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Margaret Greenwood (Labour, Centre-left): On Friday afternoon a couple, Mr and Mrs Ford, came to visit me at my surgery. Mr Ford, who is in a wheelchair, is unable to feed himself, dress himself or do anything for himself. They live on £559 a month in PIP, plus £63 per week in carer’s allowance. They still have a mortgage to pay. They have clocked up 80 years of national insurance contributions between them. They ask the simple question, "How are we meant to cope?" They were in a real state of distress. Will the Chancellor please now apologise to such people for the distress that he has caused?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Chancellor accept that poorer people spend a much higher proportion, if not all, of their income, while richer people save? Does he not accept that his Budget, which has transferred money from poor people to rich people—it is a sheriff of Nottingham Budget, robbing the poor to pay the rich—will undermine growth and deficit reduction, which is wrong both morally and economically?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
David Anderson (Labour, Centre-left): If it has been relatively simple to absorb this change, why on earth did the Chancellor introduce it in the first place and frighten the life out of seriously disabled people in this country? People were terrified about what was being proposed, yet the Chancellor has just said that we can absorb this change easily. Why did he do it in the first place?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Wesley Paul William Streeting (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor rightly talks about learning lessons, but it is also important to have clarity about the future. The Government line seems to be that there are no plans to further reduce the welfare budget, but yesterday the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions said in the House "we will not be seeking alternative offsetting savings", and that "the Government will not be coming forward with further proposals for welfare savings."—[Official Report, 21 March 2016; Vol. 607, c. 1279-86.] Will there be further welfare cuts or not? What is the answer? The Chancellor has not offered any clarity this afternoon.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment (b), in paragraph (2), after "tax", insert— "(except in relation to value added tax on insulation, solar panels and any other category of energy-saving material or their installation)" I and my party share the sentiments expressed by the Chancellor and those across the House in condemnation of what happened in Brussels today. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. We support the security measures, of course, taken by the Government and say to the people of Belgium that we stand with them I am glad to see the Chancellor has at least turned up today. Let me make it clear from the outset that, in my view, and I believe the view of many others, the behaviour of the Chancellor over the last 11 days calls into question his fitness for the office he now holds. I also believe that it certainly calls into question his fitness for any leading office in government. What we have seen is not the actions of a Chancellor, a senior Government Minister, but the grubby, incompetent manipulations of a political chancer For the record, let us go back to last Friday week. The Chancellor personally forced through cuts in personal independence payments. The statement issued by the Government that Friday on PIPs was not a consultation and not a suggestion; it was a statement of policy. Personal independence payments are the benefits that, for many disabled people, make life worth living. They help them get to work. They help them have some normality in their lives. Often, they keep people out of residential care. The Chancellor was willing to cut away that vital support to some of the poorest and most disadvantaged members of our community. Do not tell us that we are all in this together.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): Would it not at the very least help to dispel the impression that the Chancellor is acting in his own political interests, rather than in the national economic interest, if he made it clear today that he was not going to stand for the leadership of the Tory party so that he could concentrate on his job as Chancellor of the Exchequer?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): On that Friday before last, there was outrage among disability groups—the Multiple Sclerosis Society, Parkinson’s UK and Disability Rights UK. Why? Because all of them, like many of us, had gone through that process of agreeing the criteria—at least coming to some compromise on what would constitute the criteria for access to this benefit. But the Chancellor moved the goalposts, those already agreed through consultation. Disabled people and their families have been sick with worry about the threats to their benefits.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): During the Chancellor’s opening speech, we heard him say that the Government have legislated to make £12 billion-worth of savings within the welfare budget. That means that this £4.4 billion attack on PIP was in addition, and it was based neither on social justice nor on compassion. Does that not show that this Government are mean-minded and prepared to attack people who have disabilities? It is not necessary to make these cuts in welfare and they should guarantee that they are not going to return with this cut.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): No, I have given way enough—I will come back to the hon. Gentleman There is scheduled to be a 6% real-terms decline in spending on disability benefits between 2015 and 2020. After that Friday, when we reached the Wednesday of the Budget, we discovered that these cuts to disabled people were being made to pay for capital gains tax cuts benefiting the richest 5% in our society and for corporation tax cuts. Of course, a deep feeling of unfairness was felt in this House, among Members in all parts of it. I welcome the expression of concern by the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith) during that period and his conversion to our cause of opposing these benefit cuts. But the first person to call attention to the scandalous targeting of people with disabilities was my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams). She rightly said, in response to the announcement: "In coming to this decision, the Tories are yet again ignoring the views of disabled people, carers and experts in the field, trying to press ahead with changes, just two years since the introduction of the system." After it became clear that the cuts to PIP were planned as a way to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, my right hon. Friend the leader of the Labour party made this issue a key part of his excellent response to the Budget last week, and he was not alone in doing so. My hon. Friends the Members for Ilford North (Wes Streeting) and for Nottingham East (Chris Leslie) were among several Opposition Members who pressed the Chancellor on the issue, as I did when opening the Budget debate last Thursday. I want to give thanks to everyone on our Benches and across the House who has helped to force this rethink and helped end the worry that thousands of disabled people have been experiencing in the past week.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): This is a debate about the threat of cuts facing some of the most vulnerable people in our society. This is not a time for engaging in student union politics in this Chamber By Friday of last week, the Chancellor was facing so much criticism that he needed to find someone to blame. So, in one of the most despicable acts we have witnessed in recent political history, the Chancellor sent out his large team of spin doctors to try to lay the blame on the former Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green. That was a disgraceful act of betrayal of one of the Chancellor’s own Cabinet colleagues to save his own skin and his leadership hopes.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Rupa Asha Huq (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend not agree with the words of the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith) that this Chancellor’s policies are "in danger of drifting in a direction that divides society rather than unites it" Was the right hon. Gentleman not right when he said that?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I believe that the right hon. Gentleman’s interview on the Marr programme on Sunday expressed a profound concern that he had about the unfairness of the Budget, and we agreed with this. As I said, I have not agreed with a single policy he has pursued, but I do not doubt his sincerity. The right hon. Gentleman saw—
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I will in a minute. There is no need to shout out so loud again The right hon. Gentleman saw the unfairness of the PIP cuts to disabled people in the Budget. As he said, it is a Budget that benefits high earners. He also saw himself being set up by his own Cabinet colleague.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Catherine McKinnell (Labour, Centre-left): The shadow Chancellor is right to say he does not agree with the former Secretary of State’s policies. Indeed, even with the U-turn on PIP disabled people are still left distressed by the reforms that will still be going through. Will he join me in urging the Chancellor and the new Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to look again at this very flawed process?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Anna Catherine Turley (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend share my view that the most distressing thing the former Secretary of State said this weekend was the point he made about "it doesn’t matter because they don’t vote for us" Is there not a constant thread running through everything—from the bedroom tax to local government cuts to this Budget—that this is a deeply political Government who do not care unless people vote Tory?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman refers only to income tax. If he had looked at last weekend’s analysis of the overall cuts and what has happened with regard to tax and benefits, he would have seen that it is actually the poorest decile who are paying the most. The two groups hit hardest are young women with children and older women with caring responsibilities. Some 81% of the cuts are falling on women. This is a discriminatory Budget.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): We are pleased that the Chancellor has found that the PIP cuts are a cut too far, even for this ideological Government. Does the shadow Chancellor agree that characterising all benefits claimants as workshy, stay-in-bed, lazy scroungers, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has done on many occasions, contributes to an atmosphere in which it is acceptable to enrich the better off at the cost of the poorest among us?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): That language has been used by the Conservative party. Let me return to the Budget. The hon. Member for Braintree (James Cleverly), who has now left us, asked me to return to the Budget, so let me press on Even worse, there is still no certainty about further welfare cuts. We were told yesterday by the new Secretary of State for Work and Pensions—this was repeated today—that there were to be no further cuts to welfare in this Parliament. Within minutes, the Treasury were briefing to correct the Secretary of State, as that then became "no planned cuts". There is complete confusion—chaos on chaos. Nobody believes or has any confidence in the mealy-mouthed assurances that are being given today.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): In a second. The PIP withdrawal now leaves a £4.4 billion hole in the Chancellor’s Budget, as has been consistently pointed out by my right hon. Friend the Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper).
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The shadow Chancellor will be aware that page 26 of the Red Book states that the Chancellor will set out plans to meet the welfare cap by this autumn, and that page 198 of the OBR report says that that will require further welfare savings of £3 billion a year. Did he hear the Chancellor say clearly this afternoon that he was going to ditch the plans for £3 billion a year of additional welfare cuts by the end of this Parliament?
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation — House of Commons, 2016-03-22
Topic: Social Welfare
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): We supported the welfare cap. I find it ironic that that point is being made on behalf of a Government who are not meeting their own welfare cap. They are breaching it and then moving it up. They are moving the goalposts again Let us be clear that the £4.4 billion black hole in the Chancellor’s Budget means either further cuts in departmental budgets and to benefits, or stealth taxes. No solution has been announced today. We are told that all this will be resolved by the autumn. Between now and then, no public sector job, benefit or service will be safe.