argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Pensions Uprating (UK Pensioners Living Overseas) — House of Commons, 2016-05-11
Topic: Labor
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Absolutely. We owe a debt of gratitude to these people, and we should recognise that. My hon. Friend talks about the Commonwealth, and the arrangements are not reciprocal, because a Canadian pensioner who moved here would get their full pension. We need to make sure that our pensioners living in Canada are treated in the same way Anne feels that she will be forced to move back to the United Kingdom because her pension will no longer cover her day-to-day expenses, and she is increasingly reliant on her daughter to get by. She said: "It’s the small things, and the injustice, that is really getting to me. I value my independence, but I can’t go on living on the breadline and I don’t want to inflict this on my family. As well as ever-increasing poverty, I feel a sense of stress and shame, which is affecting my health." For Abhik, Rita, Anne and all those who are not getting what is rightfully theirs, let this House today send a clear and unequivocal message to the Government that we want all our pensioners, regardless of domicile, to receive what is rightfully theirs: a full state pension. Today we can take the first steps towards fixing this injustice and delivering fairness for all our pensioners.
Pensions Uprating (UK Pensioners Living Overseas) — House of Commons, 2016-05-11
Topic: Labor
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. He is being very generous with his time. Will he not accept that every other OECD country allows their pensioners who live abroad to collect their pension? Why are we standing against this? We are not talking about people getting something they are not entitled to, whether they have moved abroad before they have retired. We are talking about them getting something they are entitled to because they have made national insurance contributions. That is what we are denying them.
Pensions Uprating (UK Pensioners Living Overseas) — House of Commons, 2016-05-11
Topic: Social Welfare
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Yet again, my hon. Friend is making a powerful argument. Does not another nonsense argument about cost concern the reciprocal arrangement that is needed, given that Canadians in this country can get the full state pension from their country but British pensioners cannot get it in Canada? This is not about protecting social security in this country, because a reciprocal arrangement could easily be put in place. We are supposed to have the best social security system in the world, so the argument about cost is nonsense given that the Canadians can afford to pay for their citizens in this country.
Pensions Uprating (UK Pensioners Living Overseas) — House of Commons, 2016-05-11
Topic: Labor
Mhairi Black (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I could not agree more with my hon. Friend, and I will touch on our relationship with Canada in a minute. My argument is supported by a 2010 study by Oxford Economics, which used Government statistics to show that a pensioner who permanently leaves the UK saves it £4,300 a year in NHS usage and other social security benefits. We are placing an increasing workload and cost on to the NHS and other public bodies—the very bodies that we are simultaneously using as part of the argument to continue with frozen pensions. It makes no sense The third reason often given by the Government for this measure is that there could be some sort of legal or political backlash, but that is not the case. This issue has been debated for years, and Annette Carson made a legal challenge against the Government on the basis of discrimination. She said that because she was in South Africa, which does not have a reciprocal deal with the UK, her pension was frozen, whereas if she had moved to an EU country—or a country with such a deal—she would have had an uprated pension. The judge ruled that she lost the case and that there was no discrimination, but he noted just how ludicrous the system is, and how much confusion there is about it. He ruled that it was a political, rather than judicial, decision, which shows how crazy these plans are—the hon. Member for Worthing West (Sir Peter Bottomley) used that word previously Any pensioner who moves within the EU or the European economic area gets an increase, and the UK has reciprocal agreements with 16 countries. As the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey) pointed out, our agreements with Canada, New Zealand and Australia do not allow for uprating, yet those three countries are home to 80% of overseas residents who do not receive upratings I agree with everything that the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Mr Walker) said about choice and how that has to work both ways with the Government. The Minister said that pensioners can choose whether to go to country A that has a deal, or country B that does not, but that does not add up. Surely true freedom would allow someone to choose freely where they want to go, knowing that they have paid in all their life and will now get that back. It is not for the Government to put a hindrance on where people can choose to spend the pension that they have built up over their lifetime.
Pensions Uprating (UK Pensioners Living Overseas) — House of Commons, 2016-05-11
Topic: Labor
Mhairi Black (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): That is an interesting point, but we will wait and see how things go in the summer Everything that has been mentioned in this debate touches on a deeper, more fundamental problem within pensions as a whole under this and previous Governments—that of inconsistency. We tell people to pay national insurance for a pension and to save for a fulfilling, free and happy retirement—but only in certain places. We tell people that we will give them greater freedom, that they can be trusted with their pensions, and that we will give them greater choice and allow them to take their pensions early—but we will not give them the freedom to move anywhere with that pension. Deals are made to uprate pensions in some countries, but not others; people are given the vote in some countries, but the Government are not prepared to pay out for their pension. It does not make sense. Everything seems to be convoluted and conflicting My hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber mentioned what the Chancellor said about being supportive of change when he was in opposition, but the House of Commons Library shows that the then shadow Pensions Minister explained that the Conservatives had "considerable sympathy" with those affected. The Prime Minister stated in a letter that the Government do not feel that they can change anything in times of austerity—"How can we unfreeze those pensions when people in the UK are being asked to make sacrifices?" However, in the wake of recent events—whether the saga of the Panama papers or the shambolic deal with Google—it is clear that the Government are asking the wrong people to make sacrifices, and it is worth reminding the Minister that all the sympathy in the world will not pay the bills.
Pensions Uprating (UK Pensioners Living Overseas) — House of Commons, 2016-05-11
Topic: Labor
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): We have had a great debate and there is unity on both sides of the Chamber that the situation shames us all. Members on both sides of the House want the Government to take action. As many have said, it is about fairness. I thank the Front Benchers who have spoken, my hon. Friends the Members for Motherwell and Wishaw (Marion Fellows) and for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Mhairi Black), and the hon. Members for North Thanet (Sir Roger Gale), for Broxbourne (Mr Walker) and for Worthing West (Sir Peter Bottomley) This is a matter of considerable importance. The hon. Member for North Thanet has led the all-party parliamentary group with support from many others, including the hon. Member for Worthing West. We will not let this go, because we have a duty to stand up for the John Markhams of this world and all the others who have been mentioned I purposely did not mention the partial uprating but other hon. Members did. The Government could make a start by acknowledging the partial uprating. I say this to the Minister: please go away and talk to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who spoke in 2003 about the injustices taking place at that time. The Government should accept the moral responsibility that we have for pensioners everywhere. To take the logic of the hon. Member for Worthing West, if we as Members of Parliament decided to go and live in the British Virgin Islands, we would get our pension. If it is right for us, it is right for everybody else. Let’s do the right thing Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House notes with concern that the pensions of 550,000 UK pensioners residing in a number of overseas countries will no longer be uprated; is further concerned that this unfairness will lead to hardship for overseas pensioners and that this measure will discourage many UK citizens living in the UK from returning to their country of origin as many wish to do in their retirement; regrets that the Government has taken this action which will lead to loneliness and anger among UK pensioners living abroad; and calls on the Government to withdraw this measure and pay UK pensioners at home and abroad their due state pension with the same uprating adjustment in the interests of fairness and equity.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: I, too, pay tribute to my right hon. Friend for all the hard work that he has done leading this great country for the past few years. My right hon. Friend’s lasting legacy will include supporting the Kurds whose peshmerga are bravely fighting Daesh in all our interests. Having visited the peshmerga on the frontline, I know that our airstrikes, weapons and training are crucial, but peshmerga injuries could be reduced with additional equipment such as body armour, respirators and front-line medical facilities, and we possibly could provide some beds in our specialist hospital in Birmingham to the most seriously injured. Does he agree that that is a relatively small investment that would make a huge difference to our allies in our common fight to defeat the evil of terrorism?
Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I join the Prime Minister and the leader of the Labour party in paying tribute to all the winners at Wimbledon This week we mark the 21st anniversary of the Srebrenica genocide. As this is one of the few political causes that the Prime Minister and I both wholeheartedly support, I hope he will impress on his successor the importance of supporting the Remembering Srebrenica organisation and all the good work that it does across the UK Notwithstanding our differences, I genuinely extend my best personal wishes to the Prime Minister and his family; I wish them all the best. However, the Prime Minister’s legacy will undoubtedly be that he has brought us to the brink of being taken out of the European Union, so we on these Benches will not be applauding his premiership. What advice has he given his successor on taking Scotland out of the EU against the wishes of Scottish voters?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: I, too, pay tribute to my right hon. Friend for all the hard work that he has done leading this great country for the past few years. My right hon. Friend’s lasting legacy will include supporting the Kurds whose peshmerga are bravely fighting Daesh in all our interests. Having visited the peshmerga on the frontline, I know that our airstrikes, weapons and training are crucial, but peshmerga injuries could be reduced with additional equipment such as body armour, respirators and front-line medical facilities, and we possibly could provide some beds in our specialist hospital in Birmingham to the most seriously injured. Does he agree that that is a relatively small investment that would make a huge difference to our allies in our common fight to defeat the evil of terrorism?
Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Prime Minister’s successor is very well known in Scotland at present—this is across all the front pages—because of the threat to deport the very much loved and liked Brain family from the highlands. The first vote of her premiership is likely to be on imposing Trident against the wishes of almost every single MP from Scotland. Meanwhile, she says that she plans to plough on with Brexit, regardless of the fact that Scotland voted to remain in the EU. How does the outgoing Prime Minister think that all that will go down in Scotland?
Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: Law and Crime
Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): You will no doubt be pleased, Mr Speaker, as will hon. Members, to hear that I intend to keep my comments brief, with a view to freeing up as much time as possible for discussion of the Iraq war inquiry Although issues of national security are reserved, the Scottish Government have co-operated closely with the UK Government and will continue to do so. We recognise that the security services and the police require adequate powers to fight terrorism. However, such powers should always be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with the rule of law. We have assessed the four organisations that it is proposed to add to the proscribed list against that benchmark. There is clear evidence that the Global Islamic Media Front propagates jihadist ideology. The MIT has a clear modus operandi of attacking the police and army, and it has made many killings, as the Minister outlined. The Turkistan Islamic party has claimed responsibility for a number of atrocities in China. The JAD was responsible for the awful mall attack we all witnessed earlier this year in Jakarta I wish to add the calls from Scottish National party Members to the request made by the right hon. Member for Leigh (Andy Burnham) to the BBC to reconsider the language it uses when dealing with terrorist organisations, and in particular, the kind of legitimacy it gives by using the phrase "so-called Islamic State", which I consider to be appalling. These people are not Islamic and the phrase should not be used any more. The BBC should accede to calls championed by my SNP colleagues that we should use, as the Government now do, the term "Daesh".
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: Government Operations
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): With respect, that is precisely my question. The Information Tribunal has ordered the release of material showing why the remit of the inquiry was so refined. This is not a criticism of Chilcot; it is a criticism of the present Government for refusing to release information about why the scope of the inquiry was restricted and could not look at the legality. That is what the public want to know.
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Foreign Secretary will have seen the comments of Robin Butler before publication of the Chilcot report last week. According to Robin Butler, "The legality or illegality of the Iraq war was never a question Sir John Chilcot was asked to deal with", so why will not the Government release the documents which might give the public and Parliament an insight into why the Chilcot inquiry did not have the remit and was not qualified to deal with the legality question?
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Let me just bring the Secretary of State back for a second to the point about regime change. Does he agree that it is important that what is said in private should be reflected in Parliament, and vice versa? On 18 March 2003, Tony Blair said to Parliament: "I have never put the justification for action as regime change."—[Official Report, 18 March 2003; Vol. 401, c. 772.] However, in a private note to Bush just a week later, on 26 March, he said: "That’s why, though Iraq’s WMD is the immediate justification for action, ridding Iraq of Saddam is the real prize."
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I hear what the Foreign Secretary says about processes, but does he judge that the post-war reconstruction in Libya would give us any confidence that the lessons have been learned from the post-war reconstruction of Iraq?
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Instead of worrying about agreeing with Government Members, should the hon. Lady not be worrying about disagreeing with the comments that her leader made just at the weekend? Has she actually read the private notes that the former Prime Minister sent to the President of the United States of America, and compared them with his public and parliamentary remarks? Does she find the two things consistent?
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: Government Operations
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The report states: "The Inquiry considers that there should have been a collective discussion by a Cabinet Committee or small group of Ministers on the basis of inter-departmental advice agreed at a senior level between officials on a number of decision points" That is in paragraph 409 on page 58, if that helps the hon. Gentleman.
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: Government Operations
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows that I hold his legal expertise in the highest regard. He says that it is important that the reputation of this House is enhanced by the way in which it deals with the outcome of this report. Surely the reputation of this House will not be enhanced if there is no attempt to hold the former Prime Minister to account.
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The right hon. Lady will find, as she peruses the report, that Chilcot found it much more significant than that. That is why he said that it would make it very difficult for the UK to subsequently withdraw its support for the US. In a memo to Tony Blair, her colleague Jack Straw said: "When Bush graciously accepted your offer to be with him all the way" Can the right hon. Lady give us an explanation for that?
Report of the Iraq Inquiry — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): It is a pleasure to follow the very passionate speech by the hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Tom Tugendhat). I pay tribute to him for his service in the Iraq war In 2003, The Sun ran a story under the headline "Open Fire on Traitors". The piece, which has now been deleted from the newspaper’s website, called on readers to "aim your own missiles at the cowards and traitors who opted to support Saddam Hussain" It meant "cowards and traitors" such as Robin Cook, Charles Kennedy and other Members from all parties of the House, all of whom stood up for their principles, spoke out against Tony Blair’s war and were vilified for it. Alongside these figures stood the 1 million people who marched on the streets of London to make their case and the 80,000 people who took to the streets of Glasgow. We were not traitors and it is not cowardly to promote a minority view. At that time, it was a minority view to champion peace over war, and we now know that war was not the last resort. It took courage and bravery, and we in this House must be courageous, brave and honest by calling out a predetermined commitment to war and a failure of government for what it was—just that.
Tay Cities Deal — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: Transportation
Michael Fraser Weir (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend will be aware that, in Angus, the Scottish Government are putting serious money into dealing with, for example, the problems with the rail line. The Tay cities deal, if it comes together, would be a huge economic boost for Angus, as well as for Dundee.
Tay Cities Deal — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: International Affairs
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech, as per normal. In terms of who will benefit from the deal, I know that he would not wish to miss out Perth and Kinross-shire. Will he take this opportunity to request that the UK Government come good on their promises of support and do not leave it all to the Scottish Government, as has happened previously?
Tay Cities Deal — House of Commons, 2016-07-13
Topic: Government Operations
Christopher Murray Alexander Law (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I have to agree. It is important that a generous offer is made towards a Tay cities deal—which includes, of course, Perth and Kinross—in the very near future The team that has been put together is learning lessons from the city deals that have been developed so far, and as we know, a draft bid is already with the UK Government. By working in partnership, and by working better, faster and more effectively, we will build Dundee and the surrounding areas for the long term, future-proofing for generations to come However, it pains me to announce that the cities deal is in potential crisis. Just two months ago, I asked the Prime Minister in this Chamber during Prime Minister’s questions to give me a personal commitment to work with the Scottish Government to deliver funding for the Tay cities deal. The Prime Minister’s response was unequivocal: "I am very happy to give that commitment."—[Official Report, 11 May 2016; Vol. 609, c. 624.] Where I come from, when someone gives their word, that means everything. In other words, Dundee is a radical town that does not mince its words However, as a result of this misguided EU referendum, which Scotland neither asked for nor wanted—a referendum with no plan whatsoever for the outcome, as a result of which we have seen the resignation of the previous Prime Minister and the arrival of a new one—there is huge uncertainty about many of the UK Government’s commitments, and we now hear doubts being expressed over the Tay cities deal. Following the EU referendum, the Secretary of State for Scotland caused alarm when he told our Tay city-wide paper, The Courier, that the new Chancellor could have "a different outlook" on the commitment. Let us hope that that is not the case Not only that, but, at the earliest opportunity on returning to Parliament after the vote, I asked the former Prime Minister again in this House to reaffirm his backing and he refused to give an unequivocal answer, stating: "I cannot bind the hands of my successor".—[Official Report, 29 June 2016; Vol. 612, c. 320.] To compound the confusion, I wrote to the Scotland Office to seek clarification, and the letter that I received only last Friday tells us it is "business as usual". What are Dundee and the neighbouring communities supposed to believe? I am hoping that this evening the Minister will be able to give me an answer that is decisive, definitive and beyond any doubt, for the good people of Dundee and the surrounding areas.