argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Engagements — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: One of the biggest restraints on what is a very positive economy in York and North Yorkshire is the lack of progress on devolution. Following the rejection of the One Yorkshire proposal, does the Prime Minister agree that we need a more local approach, such as a York and North Yorkshire deal to rival those of the big urban centres?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): There is overwhelming evidence that war crimes are being committed in Yemen by Saudi Arabian forces—a state that flouts every human rights norm at home and abroad. Its Government believes that it can kill with impunity journalists or civil rights campaigners, Yemenis or Bahrainis. It funds extremism around the world, but the UK has supplied it with over £4.5 billion-worth of deadly weapons. UK weapons have been used in indiscriminate attacks on civilians in which over 200,000 people have been killed, and hundreds of thousands more stand on the brink of famine, starvation and death from wholly preventable diseases. Surely the Court of Appeal judgment should be a wake-up call to the Prime Minister and the Government. Instead of appealing the judgment, why not accept it, stop arms sales to Saudi Arabia now, bring about peace in the Yemen and save those lives?
Immigration — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Labor
Thangam Elizabeth Rachel Debbonaire (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister is being incredibly generous in giving way, and I am very grateful to her. She mentioned engagement with employers, which is of course the right thing to do. Will she consider public engagement, of the sort that Hope not Hate and British Future have carried out over the last two years, in the course of developing and expanding the policy and turning the White Paper into concrete measures? Bringing the British people with her would be the right thing to do.
Immigration — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Law and Crime
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): I welcome my hon. Friend’s announcement of the Labour party’s intention to close the Dungavel detention centre, which is a shameful stain on this nation’s conscience, as are all our detention centres—extrajudicial detention without recourse to proper justice Does my hon. Friend recognise the practice of the Home Office of moving people around different detention centres around the UK so that they are not able to access friends, family or any sort of legal representation? That is a shameful act, and it should be stopped immediately by the Home Office.
Armed Forces Day — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Government Operations
Ruth Smeeth (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister agree that we as employers in this House—every single Member of Parliament—should become covenant employers in our own right and that the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority should work with us to deliver that? We should not have to go through the MOD to deliver that; we should all be encouraging everybody to promote the covenant both in this place and in our constituencies.
Armed Forces Day — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Labor
Ruth Smeeth (Labour, Centre-left): That would be a wonderful intervention by the Minister, but I have tried to make that suggestion in private to IPSA and have not been very successful, so any help the Minister can give me to ensure that IPSA allows us all to become covenant employers would be very welcome.
Armed Forces Day — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Technology
Albert Owen (Labour, Centre-left): There has been consensus thus far in this debate, but I must point out that one way of achieving that would be to bring it in-house; let the Government of the day decide. The provision was in our manifesto and we are willing to introduce it, and it was in the right hon. Gentleman’s party manifesto as well. Let us keep those TV licences free for the over-75s.
Armed Forces Day — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Education
Ruth Smeeth (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree that one issue that is really difficult for many schools to understand is the impact of Remembrance Day on children whose parents are serving? There might be only one or two children of service personnel in each school, and when children are taught about what may be happening in various areas of conflict, it means something slightly different to those whose parents could be out there. That is why education is so important, as is making sure that the covenant applies.
Armed Forces Day — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Education
Nia Rhiannon Griffith (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We need to make sure that children are properly supported and that a structure is in place within the local authority to ensure that schools are properly educated to understand that Obviously, we are very concerned about this fragmentation of education in England, with the academies and academy trusts being a bit of a law unto themselves. What consideration have the Government given to this issue, and what conversations has the Minister had with his colleagues in the Department for Education to try to assist with the admissions process in particular The families of Commonwealth personnel, who make an important contribution to our armed forces, experience particular challenges owing to the Government’s minimum income requirements for bringing in spouses or children to this country. We on the Labour Benches believe in scrapping these income requirements so that all personnel are treated equally. I urge the Minister to prevail on colleagues in the Home Office to make that important change The nature of the work that our armed forces undertake—keeping us safe and representing us abroad—means that some people will not be in regular contact with service personnel if they do not have friends or relatives who serve. That is why Armed Forces Day is so important. It is an opportunity to say thank you, to show gratitude and appreciation and to commit to supporting our armed forces community the whole year round.
Armed Forces Day — House of Commons, 2019-06-26
Topic: Labor
Ruth Smeeth (Labour, Centre-left): Does the hon. Lady agree that it is even worse for those in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, who were not entitled to a pay rise at all, which is why they are currently consulting on an industrial dispute?
Withdrawal Agreement: Public Vote — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of a public vote on the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of a public vote on the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of a public vote on the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration.
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): Einstein is widely credited with saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing multiple times but expecting different results. If the Government intend to bring their withdrawal agreement back to Parliament in the form of a Bill, is it not the case that it is only likely to receive any sort of majority in this House on condition of an amendment in support of a public vote? Does the Secretary of State accept, in the words of his own Chancellor, that that is a "perfectly credible proposition"?
Withdrawal Agreement: Public Vote — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of a public vote on the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of a public vote on the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential merits of a public vote on the EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration.
Jeffrey Smith (Labour, Centre-left): What about a vote on the Prime Minister’s deal? In a few weeks’ time, the Prime Minister will have asked MPs no fewer than four times whether we agree with her deal. Does the Secretary of State not think it would be fair to ask the public once whether they agree with the deal?
Support for Farmers — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Agriculture
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on support for farmers after the UK leaves the EU.
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister will know that food processing is very much related to farming, and it is our biggest manufacturing sector. Has he talked to that sector? Does he not realise that research by King’s College London shows that every leave constituency of this country will be 20% worse off leaving the EU—on any terms?
Customs Union — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Foreign Trade
Gillian Furniss (Labour, Centre-left): Many of my constituents in Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough contact me regularly with their wide-ranging views on Brexit. Will the Secretary of State reassure them that they would be no worse off if we left without a customs union and without the elusive trade deal that the Secretary of State for International Trade has failed to deliver despite stating that it would be the easiest thing in human history to negotiate?
Customs Union — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Foreign Trade
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): On Monday, the Secretary of State’s two predecessors, 11 other former Cabinet Ministers and the Chair of the 1922 Committee wrote to the Prime Minister urging her "to reject a customs union solution with Labour" Many Cabinet Ministers clearly agree with them. Does the Secretary of State?
Customs Union — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I guess that might have come close to a suggestion that the Secretary of State does agree with those who are opposing the Prime Minister’s position. But this is, after all, a Secretary of State who voted with those two predecessors against his own Government’s proposal on extending article 50, even after he had recommended it to the House, so I think we deserve some clarity on these issues. The authors of Monday’s letter also said of any agreement that is reached: "No leader can bind his or her successor…so the deal would likely be…at best temporary…at worse illusory." Does he agree with that?
Leaving the EU: Sovereignty — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): A YouGov poll published today indicates that a majority of people are not happy with the European Union and feel that it may break up in the next 20 years. There is also widespread concern about the political elite both at European and national levels. Does this not show that at some time in the near future, Europe is going to go through major reform, and is it not better for us to be there and be part of that reform? Should we not therefore now be considering, in the light of the fact that there is no majority here for no deal or for a second referendum, revoking article 50?
Political Declaration: Security — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Protecting our national security from organised crime and terrorism is of course the first duty of any Government. My constituents want to know that we will still be able to participate in the European arrest warrant and share criminal record checks if or when we leave the EU, so what further progress has been made on what was put into the political declaration so many months ago?
Leaving the EU: NHS — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on the effect on the NHS of the UK leaving the EU.; What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on the effect on the NHS of the UK leaving the EU.; What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on the effect on the NHS of the UK leaving the EU.
Jenny Chapman (Labour, Centre-left): I suggest that the hon. Gentleman takes that up with the right hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove). How can we trust this Government to protect our public health or our NHS in any trade deal with the United States when they cannot agree within Cabinet? The Environment Secretary says that chlorinated chicken will be banned, but the Secretary of State for International Trade says it will not be. Who speaks for the Government on that issue?
Support for Towns — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Macroeconomics
Christopher Philip James Elmore (Labour, Centre-left): One of the ways that the Government could start moving on regeneration, not just in England but across Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, is to set out when the consultation on the shared prosperity fund will start. It was meant to start before December 2018, but Ministers from the Treasury, the Wales Office, and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy do not know when it will be. Perhaps Ministers from the Department for Exiting the European Union can give us some answers for a change.
Revoking Article 50: Voter Confidence — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): Next month, it will be three years since the referendum. Does the Minister regard the referendum choice as binding for all time? Does he not recognise that at some point it will be necessary to go back to the people and ask whether they still think leaving the EU is a good idea?
Leaving the EU: Expenditure — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): Despite talking up and legitimising a no-deal outcome for two years, the Prime Minister applied for two different extensions to the article 50 period to avoid that outcome, because she knows it would be damaging to the country. The Minister talks of £2.4 billion. Would that money not have been better spent on the fight against knife crime, on helping families struggling to cope with universal credit or on 100 other causes that would benefit our constituents, rather than on an argument that, by the Prime Minister’s actions, she has shown she does not even believe in?
Leaving the EU: Expenditure — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Matthew Thomas Pennycook (Labour, Centre-left): In an op-ed in The Sun on Saturday, the Brexit Secretary argued that "it would be inexcusable for the Government to not use the coming months to continue to prepare" for no deal. Indeed, based on his answers today, no doubt he would like to accelerate those preparations. However, as the public know, given that they get advance sight of pending public rows in their morning newspapers, the Chancellor of the Exchequer takes a different view. He recently issued an edict that no further Treasury money will be provided for no-deal planning ahead of the 31 October deadline. When it comes to no-deal planning, will the new Parliamentary Under-Secretary tell us who actually speaks for the Government?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): In February, the Secretary of State told the House: "the withdrawal agreement Bill is a significant piece of legislation and we will need to get it through the House, but the key issue is getting the deal through, because once we have done that, we will have the basis for the necessary consensus in the House to approach that legislation."—[Official Report, 28 February 2019; Vol. 655, c. 505.] That makes sense—deal first, implement second—so will the Secretary of State tell us whether the Government are going to hold a fourth meaningful vote before the withdrawal agreement Bill is introduced, or whether the House will be asked to do the opposite of what he advocated in February, and implement a deal that has not been approved?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I should have thought it was patently obvious that if the Prime Minister’s deal is put to the House for the fourth time—if that is allowed—it will fail, just as it has failed three times already Let me make clear that Labour opposes the idea of passing the withdrawal agreement Bill without an agreed deal. That would put the cart before the horse, and Labour will therefore vote against the Bill’s Second Reading. How on earth does the Secretary of State think that a Bill to implement a deal that is not before the House can be passed in two weeks’ time—or is this about keeping the Prime Minister in office for another week, and giving her a lifeline for today’s meeting of the 1922 Committee?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Environment
Questions: It is three years since the EU referendum and the chemical industry on Teesside and beyond is still nervous about the future. That is having a major impact on jobs and investment. Time and again I have raised this issue with Ministers and time and again they have failed to provide the assurances needed; what has the Brexit Secretary got to say now?; The Secretary of State said earlier that a no-deal scenario would be harmful to the economy and threaten the integrity of the United Kingdom, but he then also said that he would support a no-deal scenario rather than remaining in the European Union. So is he saying that threatening the integrity of the Union of the United Kingdom is actually a price worth paying for a hard Tory Brexit?; Nottingham has two world-class universities, and EU nationals on the academic staff and the student body make an extraordinary contribution to those schools. Can the Secretary of State give me a categorical assurance that, however Brexit is resolved, there will be no extra burdens impairing the contribution of EU nationals to those institutions?; Will the Secretary of State assure me that he has read the major piece of research led by King’s College London and Sheffield University, alongside universities across Europe, into the impact on communities of leaving the EU on any basis? Is he as dreadfully worried as I am that many of the hardest hit will be those towns and cities that voted to leave? On the basis of these figures, many people are predicting a 20% cut in GDP, which would turn those areas into investment and employment wastelands.
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): Earlier this month, the House unanimously declared a climate change emergency. Does the Minister agree that when it comes to tackling the catastrophe that is climate change—or, for that matter, challenging the overweening arrogance of the tech giants or protecting our citizens—we are stronger and have more influence as a consequence of international agreements, and that those agreements therefore enhance rather than diminish our sovereignty?
Investigation of Veterans — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Anthony Joseph Lloyd (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister rightly began by talking about victims—those who were killed, those who were killed unlawfully—and the families of those victims, who all these years on still seek truth and to know what has happened to their loved ones. As a matter of record, which I know the Minister will confirm, the overwhelming majority of the killings that took place in Northern Ireland were committed by paramilitaries, republican or loyalist—
Investigation of Veterans — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Anthony Joseph Lloyd (Labour, Centre-left): I am happy to join the right hon. Gentleman in using that word. Therefore, by definition, those were illegal and in need of investigation, where there can be no bar because of the passage of time. Every serving soldier swears an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, to "observe and obey all orders of Her Majesty, Her heirs and successors and of the generals and officers set over me." It should be axiomatic that when a soldier has obeyed those Queen’s regulations and acted within the orders set out, that individual soldier should be protected from vexatious attacks—that is legitimate whether in foreign fields or in the context of Northern Ireland. But I have to say to the Minister, and I am not sure he wants to disagree with me on this, that it is very hard for me to recognise that when a soldier has broken that solemn oath of allegiance to the Queen—a solemn oath to uphold our laws—and wilfully broken it, leading to the death of individuals, that should be put beyond time for investigation. We have to be very clear in this House that investigating the most serious crimes, where death has taken place, we have to be resolute and absolute in saying there can be no statute of limitations. Crime is crime. Murder is murder, and we need to establish as a House, as a nation, that our principles uphold the rule of law and uphold not simply our international obligations, but our moral obligations In that context, can the Minister confirm specifically that the Police Service of Northern Ireland now—and any other investigatory body—will, by law, be enjoined to investigate those most serious crimes, whether committed by republican terrorists, loyalist terrorists or those in the police service or the Army who wilfully have broken our laws? That is the important distinction. The important distinction is between protection from vexatious claims for those who legitimately carried out the Queen’s orders—that is right and proper and we should establish that—and no protection for those who wilfully broke our laws.
Probation Reform — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Eleanor Claire Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): I welcome the statement today. Dame Glenys Stacey’s annual report was absolutely damning in relation to the state of our probation services as a result of failed privatisation. I am glad that the Secretary of State has conceded that this does not work, and that payment by results does not work in probation. I have long called for a holistic probation service that centres on the needs of individuals. What support will the Secretary of State give to the National Probation Service to ensure that we move away from this tick-box exercise that exists at present and instead have a tailored support model that delivers meaningful and long-lasting results?
Probation Reform — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Government Operations
Margaret Olivia Hillier (Labour, Centre-left): This failed experiment was set to cost the taxpayer £467 million because of the early termination of contracts at the end of next year. It would be helpful to know what the total bill will be. My biggest concern as Chair of the Public Accounts Committee is that the Secretary of State has just laid out that there will be major local procurement processes over the next two years. It seems like a long time now, but that time will go very fast. How will he make sure that that procurement is done thoughtfully and sensitively and really reaches those small voluntary groups that were so cut out of the previous system?
Probation Reform — House of Commons, 2019-05-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): Despite the Secretary of State’s characteristically emollient and reasonable tone, the announcement he has made today covers up one of the most catastrophic pieces of public policy and waste of public money that we have seen in many a long year. It has let down communities that suffer from crime; it has let down victims of crime; and it has let down those people who commit crimes who have a right to try at least to change their ways. Will the Minister say something about the Secretary of State—one of his predecessors—who actually thought that this would work, and talk to us about ministerial accountability, because there seems to be absolutely none of it left in this flailing Government?