argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Criminal Offences (Misuse of Digital Technologies and Services) (Consolidation) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Well, it is always useful to have a bit of information. I greatly look forward to the result of the deliberations of the Procedure Committee, of which I think the hon. Gentleman is himself a distinguished ornament. If there are no further points of order, we shall now proceed.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): As I informed the House yesterday, my provisional certificate, based on changes made in Committee and expected Government amendments tabled for Report stage, is available in the Vote Office and on the Bills before Parliament website At the end of the Report stage on a Bill, I am required to consider the Bill as amended on Report for certification. At that point—later today—I will issue my final certificate Clause 33 Extended Sunday opening hours and Sunday working
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Amendment 19, in page 51, leave out lines 3 to 13 and insert— 2A (1) The Sunday trading authority for an area may publish a notice (a "consent notice") in accordance with this paragraph providing for large shops in tourist zones (as defined in sub-paragraph (2)) in the authority’s area to be permitted to do either or both of the following— (a) to open on Sundays falling between 21 March and 1 October and on the three Sundays before Christmas Day for a continuous period of whatever number of hours is specified in the notice (in addition to the continuous period of six hours mentioned in paragraph 2(3)), (b) to open on Sundays falling between 21 March and 1 October and on the three Sundays before Christmas Day at specified times beginning earlier than, or ending later than, the times mentioned in paragraph 2(3) (2) A consent notice published by a Sunday trading authority may only apply in relation to those parts of the authority’s area that is a "tourist zone" which is defined as— (a) a retail area where tourists from outside the United Kingdom are responsible for a significant proportion of the retail sales, or (b) a leisure and retail area, such as a coastal resort, which a significant number of tourists from outside the local authority area visit and in deciding what is significant in either case the local authority shall have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State." This amendment would allow the relaxation in Sunday opening hours for larger shops to apply between Easter and the end of September and before Christmas to areas that attract significant numbers of tourists, such as central London and coastal resorts. Government amendments 2, 13 and 14.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): Amendment 1 is in my name and those of 24 of my right hon. and hon. Friends, as well as hon. Members from across the House. I think seven different parties have signed up to the amendment. I could not quite convince the UK Independence Party Member to unite with me on the amendment, although I may continue to try to persuade him if he attends the debate. Nevertheless, there is significant cross-party support for the amendment In many ways, I would prefer not to be here; I am sorry that we have to deal with this issue. We are having to do so not least because the proper procedure has not been followed, but also because of the issue of substance around Sunday trading. Some hon. Members will remember debates on the matter in the ’90s and the ’80s, which took up a considerable amount of the House’s time and attention. The previous time the matter came before the House, it took some two years of debate to reach the compromise that we reached. We have some three hours today either to unpick that settlement or, as I seek to do in the amendment, to delete the Government’s provisions Let us remind ourselves of what the Bill is about, and how Sunday trading fits into it. As I understand it, when it first came to the House, the Bill’s aims were clear. They were to "make sure that Britain is the best place in Europe to start and grow a business and that people who work hard have the opportunity to succeed" and to "cut red tape for business, encourage investment in skills, and make it easier for small firms to resolve payment disputes by setting up a Small Business Commissioner" So say all of us, or certainly those of us on the Government Benches. The Bill is important, and I support it up to the point of its conclusion about Sunday trading.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): If my right hon. Friend will be patient, the purpose of my speech is to explain the reasons why I oppose the Government. We need to look at where the Government are taking us, even though they are trying to get there through a permissive, devolutionary approach. It is based on the premise that the deregulation of Sunday trading is good for small businesses, families and workers. We need to look at that premise. Deregulation is a one-way valve that local authorities would have the option of taking. I know that many Conservative Members are pure localists, who might want the decision about whether to restrict or deregulate Sunday trading to be a purely local one. The Government make the case that this is good for small businesses, but I object to that. I want to look at the way in which the Government have approached the question and carried out the consultation.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Other
Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank my hon. Friend for his speech and his strong leadership on the matter. Does he agree that the Government’s case would be more compelling had they abided by the undertaking that the Minister has twice given to publish the impact assessment, which we are led to believe is positive and favourable? So far, the Government have not done so.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I am a lawyer by profession, and I believe that the hon. Gentleman has asked me a leading question. Plainly, the measure was not in the manifesto. Not only that, but the Prime Minister confirmed on 20 April 2015, in the middle of the campaign, in a letter to the "Keep Sunday Special" campaign: "I can assure you that we have no current plans to relax the Sunday trading laws. We believe that the current system provides a reasonable balance between those who wish to see more opportunity to shop in large stores on a Sunday, and those who would like to see further restrictions." That pretty much sums up my position, on which I have been consistent. The Prime Minister appeared to share my position back in April.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Other
Robert Edward Jenrick (Conservative, Centre-right): I hope that my hon. Friend knows that I have enormous respect for him and for his campaigns on many issues, on which I have worked with him, but does he not agree that we should just trust our constituents to make up their own minds? In life, we all have to find our own balance, and we are all capable of deciding whether we work or shop on a Sunday. That is not the most complicated decision that our constituents will make in their lives. Will not my hon. Friend trust his constituents to make wise decisions for themselves and their families?
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention. I saw that "but" coming. We have a job to do in Parliament. We do not simply devolve every decision out to our constituents. We should listen to our constituents. I am not sure whether he has looked at his mailbag, but I have looked at mine, and many shop workers, faith groups and others have asked me, "Why are we doing this? Why are we trying to unpick something that is fairly settled, even if it is not perfect?" I have listened to my constituents. We have important principles as well. The Sunday trading arrangement is complex, and it is our duty to look at it carefully, to consult widely and to scrutinise it fairly. None of those things has happened to the extent that they did in the ’90s and ’80s. It should not surprise us that there is a lot of cross-party concern. I would agree with my hon. Friend if this were a wholly devolving measure, but it is not. It is based on a principle that we would have to sign up to.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): In a moment. When we make this decision here in Parliament, everyone who votes against amendment 1 will have to agree with the premise that deregulation is good for businesses, families and workers. Members have to make this decision; we cannot simply devolve it to local authorities That is the premise of the case that the Government are making today.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I will come on to that point. The Government have made the case that the Bill will support high streets and deal with the challenges of online shopping and the like. However, to go back to the campaign, when my hon. Friends and other Members were campaigning up and down their high streets—my constituency is full of high streets, like many other constituencies—was this mentioned to them? I do not remember that happening. In fact, only one large outlet, Asda, mentioned it. The rest did not once say that the way to rebuild and regenerate high streets was to deregulate Sunday trading. In fact, they wanted business rates, car parking and things such as that to be sorted out I do not need to rely only on what my constituents are saying. Let me look at the Government’s review, which was a proper review, into how we can regenerate and improve the high street. If we page through that substantial review, we will not see a big case being made that the one way to regenerate the high street is to deregulate shopping hours for large shops. That will threaten small businesses.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): There will be the inevitable domino effect of a race to the bottom if local authorities get hold of the powers. We should not just see this as a matter that can be left to local authorities. The Government have said that this provision is good for high streets, businesses, shop workers and families.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I will carry on for a moment The Government are making the case for devolving such powers and they must be held to account for it—it is for them to make that case—but the reality is that the substance of their case does not meet the high threshold required to justify unpicking the complicated Sunday trading laws.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Mark Christopher Field (Conservative, Centre-right): I am sure that those who know my hon. Friend would agree that it is very rare for him to be in any sort of unholy alliance. I am very much of the view that the compromise made 30 years ago has worked fairly well. Does he not recognise that there is no sense of imposition? As my right hon. Friend the Member for East Yorkshire (Sir Greg Knight) rightly pointed out, the approach is a permissive one. In my constituency, which I accept is a relatively exceptional one in the centre of a city, there would certainly be a demand, particularly during times when we have a high number of tourists, for local authorities to give such permission, but that would be up to local authorities to manage. This is quite a good compromise, given the great changes that have taken place in shopping patterns in the past 30 years, not least with the internet.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I hear that point. Throughout this process, I have been open to such a debate, and I know that the large shops in the west end, such as Harrods in Knightsbridge, have made a strong case for opening for longer for tourists. That is part of the Government’s economic case, but I do not think it is substantial enough. It is based around the New West End Company model in particular. However, research by Oxford Economics and others shows that we must look at the economic impact more widely, not simply at the benefits for larger businesses. Hon. Friends and hon. Members know that we should not just listen to big business; we are concerned about shop workers and small businesses, and it is important to say that the impact on them should not be underestimated.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Richard Quentin Fuller (Conservative, Centre-right): I am not that new. Can my hon. Friend knock on the head the point that Conservative Members are making about permission? The issue is not about the fact that permission is given; it is about who will exercise that permission. The permission will be exercised by local authorities, but do individual shop workers who wish to run their own store six or seven days a week have such a right of permission?
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes, that is true. We should not tar all large retailers with the same brush. I think Tesco has also expressed concern. Some of them have no doubt got a commercial interest—they may have more convenience stores on high streets than other large retailers—but they share the concern that the Government’s devolutionary approach is not so practical for larger businesses, given that there are issues in relation to distribution centres and dealing with waste recycling. This will make things more complicated for them. In essence, the Bill is about cutting down on red tape and about deregulation, but this would mean a move in the opposite direction for such businesses.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): The issue about tourists is not for me. I will leave my right hon. Friend the Member for Meriden (Mrs Spelman) to make such a case in relation to her amendment 19 I want to turn to the substance of the issue, which is first of all about process. This is a controversial matter. No one who has been around for a while and who has listened to people’s concerns will deny that it is controversial. That is plainly the case given that it divides opinions so much in this House.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I want to make some progress Normally, as I understand it, the guidance for a Government consultation on a controversial matter is to allocate a full 12-week period for the consultation. However, the consultation that has led to where we are now not only lasted just six weeks, but happened right in the middle of the summer holidays at the start of August. This particularly important consultation ran for two weeks in the central period of the holidays. Why did that happen? Was there a rush to get the measure on the statute book immediately? The Government took some five months to respond to that rushed consultation, which nevertheless managed to generate some 7,000 responses, which is extraordinary, given the time constraints. If such a controversial measure elicited that number of responses, all parliamentarians must ask why it did not get the full scrutiny that it deserved in both Houses. There was an attempt to tack it on to the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill, and now it has been tacked on to the Enterprise Bill, after that has already been through the Lords. Someone who was cynical or suspicious might say that that limits the scrutiny of an important measure These are not just my concerns. When we last had the opportunity to discuss this matter, which was during the passage of the Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Bill in 2012, it did receive full scrutiny. The then Minister, Lord Sassoon, underlined the temporary nature of the proposed change. As many hon. Members have said, we had assurances from the Government that that was not a precursor to a further deregulatory move. Lord Sassoon also gave an assurance that there would be full parliamentary debate if there were ever another Sunday trading legislative proposal, but we have not had that. Unfortunately, that promise has not been kept. That is to the detriment of us all, as it would have allowed us to consider matters such as tourist zones and pilot areas, about which we will probably hear later. All those aspects need time for proper scrutiny.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Centre-right): Will my hon. Friend nail the myth that the measure is designed to assist town centre retail trade? Some 53% of local authority chief executives said that they would use the new liberalisation to boost out-of-town shopping centres, but that cannot be what many hon. Members want.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): Indeed. The knock-on effects of the measure need careful thought and attention The consultation showed that 76% of local authorities, large and medium-sized business respondents and business representative organisations were in favour of the proposals, but while the Government told us that those organisations and local authorities were in favour, they failed to tell us about the proportion for individual responses. We all have a right to respond individually to Government consultations. We all have a voice. It is not just the big corporate bodies whose response counts My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) and I duplicated a question to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills to ask what number and what proportion of respondents to the Department’s consultation published on 5 August responded yes and no—it is a simple question. The first question in the consultation asked whether people were in favour of the proposal, so surely it is possible to publish the number of respondents. That question was, "Should local areas have the power to extend trading hours on Sunday?" and that is the question that we are debating today, so it would be useful to know how many individuals who responded to the consultation were in favour of the proposal The answer that my hon. Friend and I received from the Minister is one of the most extraordinary that I have seen in my 10 years here. It stated: "The Department does not hold full data from this consultation broken down by specific question as a large portion of respondents chose to respond in their own words"— I assume that they were English words and there was no problem of translation— "rather than addressing the consultation questions directly, and/or did not indicate the type of organisation they represented." That is unacceptable. There should be a proper, accountable process that enables us to judge the response to the consultation on the measure.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Michael Tyrone Ellis (Conservative, Centre-right): I very much respect my hon. Friend and his viewpoints. Nevertheless, will he explain why he thinks that high streets should be held back under restrictions when most internet shopping takes place on a Sunday? He refers to the consultation, but when people shop via the internet, are they not voting with their fingers, so to speak? Do they not want to be able to shop free from restrictions? Does not my hon. Friend want to support the high street in his constituency and those elsewhere in functioning without these restrictions?
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend will know that the Government’s review regarding high streets, about which he and I had concerns, made the case not for deregulation, but for dealing with issues such as parking and business rates, on which the Government are making good progress. On internet shopping, can a case be made that in the hours when large shops are not open—after 6 pm, say—everyone is clicking away on their computer because they cannot get to those shops? That makes no sense. There are other ways in which we can handle internet shopping. We need to look more broadly at how we can revitalise the high street, and this measure is not the way to do it.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
Michelle Emma May Elizabeth Donelan (Conservative, Centre-right): I, too, respect the comments of my hon. Friend, but will he explain why we are so concerned about the family impact on those working in retail, yet we do not regulate for those who work shifts in sectors such as the NHS, transport, catering, hospitality—the list goes on?
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Mixed Topics
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend makes a good point. It is often low-paid workers, in many cases women, who are affected by Sunday trading, and such trading has a knock-on effect on ancillary services in the supply chain to large stores. That, too, needs careful consideration On my substantive objections to the proposal, beyond the process—important though that is in determining how Members will vote later—an economic case has been made. It is important that we look at the evidence provided by not just the New West End Company, but Oxford Economics, which I mentioned earlier. It projects that under the Government’s proposals, 8,800 jobs would be lost in the convenience sector, with a net loss of 3,270 jobs in the wider grocery sector because of displaced trade from small to large businesses.
Enterprise Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): I am sorry, but I am going to make some progress so that other hon. Members have a chance to contribute to this important debate I am no great expert on businesses—I am taking the evidence that I have seen—but I do listen to the representatives of business organisations. When the Federation of Small Businesses, the Association of Convenience Stores, the National Federation of SubPostmasters, the Rural Shops Alliance, the Federation of Wholesale Distributors and the National Federation of Retail Newsagents—many of us will have been to their regular receptions here, and expressed solidarity with them and concern about the challenges they face—are all united in saying that this change is bad news for our economy, I take that very seriously, as should other Members.