argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Britain in the World — House of Commons, 2015-06-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I have just heard what seems to be a support for renewal of the Trident nuclear system. The shadow Foreign Secretary has already disagreed with Kezia Dugdale on the question of the participation of European citizens. Is the shadow Foreign Secretary aware that the sole remaining Labour MP from Scotland does not share his opinion on Trident renewal?
Britain in the World — House of Commons, 2015-06-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I said "almost voted for a ground incursion in Syria." If the Government had not been defeated, make no mistake, there would be an extreme likelihood of British troops in Syria. If British troops had been in Syria at present, they would perhaps have been simultaneously fighting against President Assad and some of the opponents of President Assad. Keeping that option open can be called many things, but it could not be called a coherent military or foreign policy. I hope that we learn the lessons that Chilcot has to teach and that there is a proper examination of that report, and indeed of those whom it might criticise.
Small Businesses (Prompt Payment) — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Domestic Commerce
John Joseph McNally (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): There are many roofing businesses and other small and medium-sized enterprises in Falkirk, and the time and effort involved in chasing late and incomplete payments is a serious burden on them. What plans do the Government have to ensure that the onus is on large contractors to pay, as opposed to SMEs having to chase?
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Scottish National party has always spoken of powers for a purpose. The reason we are having this debate is that we were promised, as were the people of Scotland, in the run-up to the referendum that we would have a new federalism that was as near to home rule as possible. I hope that the hon. Gentleman accepts that that is the position of the SNP and what the people of Scotland can expect. We want to grow our economy and bring some fairness to society right now, but the hon. Gentleman took to the Lobby with the Government to support further austerity for Scotland.
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Eilidh Whiteford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On the very last day of the last Parliament, if the hon. Gentleman remembers, the Work and Pensions Committee—with a majority of coalition Members—called for a root-and-branch review of the sanctions regime. The reason why it did that should be self-evident to every Member of the House. We have seen repeatedly how the most vulnerable people in our communities fall foul of that sanctions regime. People with mental health problems and single parents are being disproportionately sanctioned. Members of Parliament can turn up five minutes late to meetings all over this place and do not lose their pay, so why should the most vulnerable and the disabled be subject to sanctions? I agree with the Work and Pensions Committee, which twice in the last Parliament called for a root-and-branch review. We could do so much better in Scotland.
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): This is now day three in Committee on the Scotland Bill, and thus far the Government have refused to accept any amendments. The Scottish Parliament’s Devolution (Further Powers) Committee has said that the Bill does not meet Smith, and the House of Commons Library says that it does not meet Smith.
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Other
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Will the Government now agree to accept some of the amendments? I tell the right hon. Lady that she had better not even be thinking of amending the Bill in the House of Lords, out of sight of democratic scrutiny by this House. Will she assure me today that the Government will not table amendments in the House of Lords, but will do so on the Floor of the House of Commons?
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Housing
Eilidh Whiteford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment 118, page 26, line 20, leave out from "unless" to end of line 25 and insert "they have consulted the Secretary of State" This amendment would remove the requirement for the Scottish Government to obtain consent from a UK Secretary of State in relation to Universal Credit and the costs of claimants who rent accommodation.
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Housing
Eilidh Whiteford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend makes a very pertinent point. During the intervening months between the simple request and getting the permission we needed, some of our most disadvantaged citizens continued to accrue rent arrears or had to do without essentials in order to meet their liabilities. That is just one concrete example of how restrictions of this type currently act as a stalling mechanism and a barrier to progressive change, and they demonstrate why we need to get rid of the veto Other examples of things we could do with these provisions include the power to maintain direct payments of housing benefit to social landlords—something that I think is in everybody’s interests—and the power to ensure that under universal credit claimants can receive individual payments, which potentially benefits women and children and protects their interests. Then there is the power to equalise the earnings disregard between the first and second earners in a household. Again, given the persistent pay gap in Scotland between women and men, that measure could predominantly benefit up to 70,000 women by up to £1,200 a year. By contrast, if we leave the Bill unamended, we curtail the powers of the Scottish Parliament to enact policies that are overwhelmingly in the interests of our citizens and are supported by them. We risk seeing such measures batted off into the long grass We also store up trouble down the line. It is fair to say that the Secretary of State got himself in a richt kirn earlier this month on the "Scotland 2015" programme when he was asked directly about the veto. When the presenter put it to him that "it could be used to block if there was a political will to do that because who would decide if the Secretary of State was unreasonably withholding consent?", the Secretary of State said: "Well, I would hope that it would never come to that, but because it’s on the face of the legislation ultimately it might be the courts that would decide." I fear that the Secretary of State has let the cat out of the bag; I suspect he was a lot more candid than he intended to be. I think we can infer from that very revealing remark that he knows that, in practice, this Bill’s measures will act as a veto on the Scottish Parliament—pure and simple. I put it to the Committee that if the Scottish Parliament has to go to court to enforce the powers devolved in the Bill, it is not worth the paper it is written on.
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Housing
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that parts of the United Kingdom are already more unattractive because of decisions on welfare spending? The bedroom tax is one example. In the highlands, there are some 70 communities with no one or two-bedroom properties on the social register for people to move to. How can it possibly be fair for that principle to apply across the UK, when the people who live there are unable to cope with that heinous tax?
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Other
Thomas Sheppard (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Does the Secretary of State not accept that, if we read further in the letter, we find that the Deputy First Minister fears that that process is not going to take place? We, too, are marvelling at the fact that after four days of debate, the Secretary of State still refuses to accept one single line of one single amendment that has been put to him.
Scotland Bill — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Other
Eilidh Whiteford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): We have had an interesting and wide-ranging debate on the amendments this afternoon, perhaps more wide-ranging than I could ever have envisaged. I am not sure how we managed to get sidetracked into Greece so early in the afternoon’s debate, and the comparison between Greece and Scotland did seem rather ill-conceived. It was, of course, refuted ably and comprehensively by the hon. Friend of the right hon. Member for Wokingham (John Redwood), the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh). However different Scotland and Greece might be in cultural, economic and climatic terms—
City Deal Funding (Aberdeen) — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stuart Blair Donaldson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree that it is great to see the councils of both Aberdeenshire and Aberdeen city working together to secure this deal, which will benefit both the people in my constituency and hers?
City Deal Funding (Aberdeen) — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Thank you for your advice, Mr Deputy Speaker. Does my hon. Friend agree that this is an opportunity for the UK Government to demonstrate a commitment to the cities and regions in our area, which is the most northerly part of Scotland and the UK?
City Deal Funding (Aberdeen) — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Housing
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Absolutely. That is very important. As I said, there has been a level of concern from some of our residents that we are a bit forgotten about, because we are so far away. We need to work to change that The city deal for Aberdeen is a truly excellent example of joint working, not just between the two Governments, where relations have occasionally been strained, but between the two councils, where this level of joint working simply has not been seen before. One of the most difficult problems for those living in Aberdeen city and shire is the cost of housing. There is a lack of affordable accommodation, and our councils and NHS are finding it difficult to keep key workers. In recent years, we have struggled to recruit and retain teachers, social workers and nurses. With high land values in Aberdeen, it is really difficult for social landlords to fund the building of new social housing. For years, the city’s social housing stock has been reducing, and there are thousands of families on the council’s housing waiting list. Despite some recent new builds, many are still stranded in inappropriate accommodation or forced to consider moving to other parts of the region or country The city deal proposal includes a £350 million ring-fenced loan guarantee facility from Infrastructure UK for housing in Aberdeen city and Aberdeenshire. It also proposes a significant increase in the number of homes available for lease from both councils. As I mentioned in my maiden speech, the lack of suitable affordable housing is a huge problem for my constituents, and the issue is exacerbated by the success of the oil and gas sector. I really cannot overstress the importance of this issue to people living in Aberdeen.
City Deal Funding (Aberdeen) — House of Commons, 2015-06-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Yes, we do have trains, unlike in some parts of northern Scotland. We are very lucky. The upgrades to the line, however, will make a significant difference to commuters. A huge number of people commute already, particularly from regions in the north-east, and if we can improve the railway line, particularly by dualling it in places so that more trains can pass, that will only improve our connectivity We need to ensure that our population continues to live and work successfully in the area. In Aberdeen, we have low unemployment, at just 2.3%, but 25% of our working age population earn under £15,000 a year. Large salaries are pushing up the cost of land and the price of housing, however, so we need to ensure that those on lower wages have access to affordable or social housing, both of which have been sadly lacking in Aberdeen throughout the past 20 years. Lower housing costs increase people’s and families’ disposable incomes, which boosts the local economy by increasing spending In order to sustain the oil and gas industry and unlock future opportunities, we must act now to ensure that Aberdeen continues to be a competitive region and a global centre of excellence. With the challenges of a mature field and a low oil price, we need to get very good very quickly at performing in this new environment. Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire need to become world leaders at things such as decommissioning—we have the talent and skills locally and the ability to export those skills as other fields across the world reach the end of production. We have the export infrastructure—we are very good at it and we do it a lot—but we need to be doing the same for things such as decommissioning. We can be world leaders in this. We also have a huge pool of talented engineers, scientists and industry experts in technology, which means that Aberdeen is uniquely placed to take the lead for the UK in renewable technologies as well I look forward to hearing the Minister’s views on the Aberdeen city region deal. I am keen to hear whether he can provide us with more information on the timeline going forward. This is a long overdue and positive initiative for our wonderful city.
Cross-border Trade — House of Commons, 2015-02-25
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: What assessment he has made of the potential effect on cross-border trade between the north of England and the border region of Scotland of the proposals of the Smith commission.
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Had the Smith commission been faithful to the famous vow and had the Better Together parties not watered down the tepid Smith commission, does the Secretary of State think that the benefits to the north of England, as well as to Scotland, would have been greater?
Members’ Paid Directorships and Consultancies — House of Commons, 2015-02-25
Topic: Mixed Topics
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I know one, and yes he will This House is able to secure only 60% of popular support. That suggests to me that the people of these islands are looking for something different. They are sick and tired of the antics of this particular House. That is reflected in how they are responding to the way the Westminster establishment parties do their business. They are sick and tired of the self-justification: the special pleading; the bleating; the idea that somehow this House is enriched because Conservative Members can make some extra money; that this House is enriched because they bring outside experience to it; and that we cannot live on £67,000 a year. Tell that to our constituents! That is treble the national average wage. Our constituents are currently suffering austerity and a diminution of their annual income. They are experiencing real poverty and real difficulty, yet this House tells them that right hon. and hon. Members cannot get by on £67,000 a year I believe that being a Member of Parliament is a full-time job. In fact, we have got two jobs: we have our responsibilities in this House, and then we have our obligations to our constituents. Becoming a constituency Member of Parliament has changed dramatically in the 14 years that I have been here. It has become much more technical and much more complicated, with a greater amount of different tasks and skills needing to be acquired to serve members of the public efficiently and effectively. The suggestion that this can be combined with a second job with outside earnings is something I believe our constituents would find very difficult to accept.
Rule of Law (Magna Carta) — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What steps he is taking to ensure that the rule of law continues to be upheld in line with the principles of Magna Carta.
Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Prime Minister celebrated the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta by announcing his intention to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998. The Attorney General will no doubt be aware that the European convention on human rights is enshrined in UK law through the Human Rights Act and, in Scotland, through the Scotland Act 1998. What assessment has he made of the implications of the repeal, particularly for the relationship and interactions between Scots law and the legal system of England and Wales?
Participation in Public Life — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Despite the lauded progress that is apparently being made, only 26% of 110 Government posts are occupied by women. Does the Minister agree that it would be a fine time to follow the example of the Scottish Government and persuade the Prime Minister to create a gender-balanced Cabinet?
English Votes on English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Other
Michael Fraser Weir (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I listened carefully when the Leader of the House said that there would be no changes in the House of Lords. He went on to say that if amendments were made that affected England only, there would be a veto by English MPs. What happens if the House of Lords decides to extend the extent of a Bill to bring in Scottish matters or to change things affecting Scotland? Will Scottish MPs get a veto over that?
English Votes on English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Other
William Arthur Roger Mullin (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The West Lothian question is as of nothing compared with the utter shambles in the House today. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Perth and North Perthshire (Pete Wishart),I think that the Speaker of this House is being put in an utterly invidious position. Will you pass on the message to Mr Speaker, Madam Deputy Speaker, that, with the utmost goodwill, I shall be the arbiter of what is in the interests of my constituency? Nobody in this House speaks for my constituency other than me
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Yesterday we had an excellent debate on equal pay and gender inequality. You might recall that many women Members made the point that they were very uncomfortable with how they are addressed in the House. I do not think that can be ignored. Will you and the Speaker look into the matter and perhaps consider making the language more gender neutral in order to address those concerns?
Britain and International Security — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Mixed Topics
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): One of the most striking images of the terrorist attacks in Tunisia last week was of Muslim hotel workers who lined up to prevent Daesh terrorists from slaughtering more guests in a neighbouring hotel. Would it not be more appropriate, for the purposes of this debate and beyond, that we refer to the perpetrators of these attacks as Daesh rather than granting them the legitimacy and association with Islam that the term "ISIL" or "Islamic State" provides?
Britain and International Security — House of Commons, 2015-07-02
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Far be it for me to defend the BBC, since it has done so little in Scotland recently to merit defence, but does the right hon. Gentleman not allow that perhaps we should unite across the Chamber in the expression of the term Daesh and the wisdom of using it? Once we do that, we can then reflect on whether the broadcasting organisations would follow, as opposed to just turning this into a bash the BBC session.
Tax Avoidance (HSBC) — House of Commons, 2015-02-23
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Michael Fraser Weir (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The revelations about HSBC are just the latest in a long line of misdeeds by our banks, which are undermining confidence in the system throughout. Too often, HMRC seems to be on the back foot. The Chancellor said that if it required more resources it would be given them. Will he commit those resources to a proactive investigation of the role of banks, and some of the larger accountancy firms, in both tax avoidance and tax evasion?
Illegal Migration — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Can we see illegal migrants to Europe first and foremost as human beings and give them all the dignity, care and respect we can, especially by ensuring the availability of rescue facilities as they cross the Mediterranean?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): May I begin by expressing my sadness at the untimely death of Charles Kennedy? I know that we will pay tributes a little later It is a stain on the conscience of Europe that thousands and thousands of refugees have been dying in the Mediterranean, when many lives could have been saved. Does the Prime Minister agree that the role of the Royal Navy, the Italian coastguard and the navies of other European countries is making a profound difference? However, much more needs to be done, including offering refuge and asylum to those who need it.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Eighty years ago, that is what the United Kingdom did, when it offered refuge and asylum to those who were being pursued by the Nazis. We all know about the Kindertransport and the children who were accepted and given refuge in the UK. Now, in contrast, the UK has an appalling record on the resettlement of Syrian refugees and is not prepared to co-operate with other European nations on accepting refugees who have been rescued in the Mediterranean. Why does the Prime Minister think it is fair for Sweden, Germany and other countries to accept those refugees, while the UK turns its back on them?