argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Immigration
Edward Garnier (Conservative, Centre-right): One never knows if the draught is going one way or the other, but let us hope that there is some meeting of minds. As I said, it is not a matter of fundamental principle; I just think it would be neater and more accurate to use the expression "managed return" I have no objection to the Home Secretary, in an emergency, making an order that governs the return of British citizens to this country, but within a short space of time—by that I mean hours and, at the most, a fortnight, three weeks or four weeks—the order should be supervised by the courts. Most obviously, it could be supervised by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, which is now used to hearing matters in private. I know there are objections, but it is used to hearing from special advocates who can present information to the court on behalf of the respondent to the application, who, although the client, cannot hear all that is being said about him. SIAC would be the most obvious court to deal with these cases. The sooner they get to a court experienced in dealing with issues of national security and evidence that cannot be revealed to the wider world, the better. I have a little difficulty, however, with the Secretary of State being given the power to manage someone’s return and exclude them for as long as two years. We need to think about that, and I hope that the Minister, when he responds, will give me some comfort. I am attracted by the thrust of new clause 2 tabled by the right hon. Member for Delyn, but I am not yet sufficiently persuaded that it will not be bettered by something the Minister, who is a man of great acuity, could come up with, if not this afternoon, then soon. I ask the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, to keep his new clause on hold and let the Minister, either here or in another place, deal with the problem in a way that is acceptable to the Government, the Opposition and those of us on the Government Benches—their loyal supporters—who would like to see the Bill adjusted. That way, before long, we could have a Bill that satisfies us all and deals with the problem of what to do about people who want to do disobliging things to us and our allies, either here or abroad.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
Edward Julian Egerton Leigh (Conservative, Centre-right): Of course I do not propose to leave it to the public and their anger. That is taking my arguments to an extreme limit. I am not suggesting that there should be a lynch mob and that everyone who comes back from Syria should be stopped by the public. We are not talking about the public. We are talking about the Secretary of State acting reasonably, on the basis of all the Government and intelligence sources available to her, to exclude someone temporarily from coming back to this country. This is not an assault on Magna Carta, habeas corpus or the traditional rights of English people; it is a sensible precaution, taken in circumstances in which we face jihadists who have no concept of our liberties, or indeed of any kind of logic. That is why I support the Government’s position.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
David Michael Davis (Conservative, Centre-right): It is necessary to protect public security while avoiding miscarriages of justice. Does my hon. Friend accept that, in a number of cases, the clear finding of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission—the court, a secret court, that will probably consider these matters—has been that the Home Secretary of the day has made a mistake, sometimes on the basis of fallacious evidence and sometimes on the basis of straightforwardly bogus evidence presented by the intelligence agencies? The protection against that, surely, is a court, even if it has to be a secret court.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Civil Rights
Edward Julian Egerton Leigh (Conservative, Centre-right): I broadly accept that point. Much as I admire the Secretary of State and her advisers, I freely accept that she may make a mistake. However, I think that, just as in the second world war, the threat is such that there must be some diminution of our traditional civil liberties to protect the liberty of the wider public. I am not saying that the end justifies the means, but we are in a very dangerous situation We are talking about the Bill; we are not talking about hypothetical situations. The Bill lays an injunction on the Secretary of State to act reasonably, and if a court finds that the Secretary of State has acted unreasonably, it can reverse her decision. I repeat, however, that we are not talking about some fundamental assault on civil liberties, or about depriving people of their liberty in this country. We are simply talking about a reasonable belief that people have fought jihad and a reasonable belief that they are a threat to our people. I think that the bulk of members of the public and the majority of Members of Parliament trust the Secretary of State to act reasonably.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Immigration
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): I absolutely endorse what my hon. Friend has said. This is not about citizenship. This is a temporary exclusion order. I have said in the House on many occasions, and indeed in evidence to Select Committees, that individuals will not be rendered stateless. They will not be left unable to return to the UK for an indefinite period—they must be issued with a permit to return within a reasonable period of time if they apply for one and attend an interview if required to do so. Quite simply, the power ensures that the Secretary of State is able to control the return of certain individuals suspected of terrorism-related activity abroad and appropriately manage the threat that they pose once they have arrived back in the UK. Obviously, they will be excluded for a time during which the permission may be granted—indeed, they may choose not to return during that time—but the power is framed in that manner and does not link into the broader issues of statelessness that are of concern to some Members and have been addressed more recently in the Justice and Security Act 2013, for example.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Immigration
Edward Garnier (Conservative, Centre-right): What the Minister has just said seems to support the suggestions made by me and others that this is not a temporary exclusion order. It is not an exclusion order at all; rather, it is a managed return order. If we get the semantics right, a lot of the other stuff fits better into place.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Other
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): There are a number of issues that require further consideration. It is better to get this right and to consider things carefully, and the debates we have had in this House have enabled us to advance in that regard. Rather than, as has happened in other cases, having legislation rushed through both Houses of Parliament, we have enabled good and proper scrutiny of this legislation, to ensure that it is appropriate and we get it right.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Civil Rights
William Nigel Paul Cash (Conservative, Centre-right): The Minister frames his response in a reasonable manner but, in line with the international convention on the reduction of statelessness, which is relevant to this measure and to which David Anderson did not refer when he appeared before the Joint Committee on Human Rights, it is an act of treason when a person repudiates allegiance. Such repudiation is not just a theoretical, academic act under an ancient 1351 enactment; it is the repudiation of allegiance to the state. When someone repudiates that allegiance and adopts an allegiance to another state, it is treason. Surely, by their self-denial and repudiation, they have denied themselves the right to the liberties that have been referred to continually by all my colleagues who have said that we must insist on the common law and on the liberty of the subject. Such people repudiate it themselves.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Other
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): We discussed this matter in Committee, and I do not intend to detain the House for a great deal of time given the succinct way in which the right hon. Member for Delyn (Mr Hanson) highlighted his case.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment 11, page 30, line 14, at end insert— "(c) the individual subject whose travel document has been removed may appeal against this decision in the courts over the evidence on which conditions in paragraph 2(1)(a) and (b) of this Schedule were met, (b) the appeal must have been heard within seven days of an application, (c) the Secretary of State must by regulation make provisions about the relevant court, (d) the power to make regulations under this section— (i) is exercisable by statutory instrument; (ii) includes power to make transitional, transitory or saving provision; (e) a statutory instrument containing regulations under this section is subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament." This amendment would create the right for an appeal in court following a temporary seizure of a passport and require the appeal to have been heard within seven days.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Immigration
Robert Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Centre-right): My children have three passports: French, Swiss and British. Is there any provision enabling someone whose British passport is taken away to be prevented from using another passport? I am sorry; that may be a silly question, and we may not be able to provide for such a power.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Immigration
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): The Bill is, of course, a wider subject than the amendment, but my hon. Friend may wish to consult paragraph 1(7) of schedule 1, which defines a passport as "a United Kingdom passport… a passport issued by or on behalf of the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom", or "a document that can be used (in some or all circumstances) instead of a passport."
Mobile Phone Signal (Fownhope) — House of Commons, 2015-01-06
Topic: Other
Adam Afriyie (Conservative, Centre-right): I apologise for missing the first few moments of my hon. Friend’s remarks. I can bear testimony to the fact that in Fownhope in his constituency, which I visited very recently, one could not only not lean out of a window for a signal but not lean anywhere because there was no signal at all. I very much welcome this debate and value his contribution.
Child Poverty — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
David Gordon Mundell (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and a key figure that demonstrates our ability to deal with the issue is the record number of women in work in Scotland. I would have thought that politicians in all parts of the House would welcome that.
City Link — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David Gordon Mundell (Conservative, Centre-right): As the hon. Lady will be aware, the administrators will provide a report to the Insolvency Service on what happened at City Link during the period immediately before the redundancies and administration were announced, and we will obviously reflect on that. I take on board her point about self-employed contractors, and I will raise that directly with DWP colleagues.
City Link — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David Gordon Mundell (Conservative, Centre-right): As the hon. Lady will have heard me say, the administrators will provide a report to the Insolvency Service. The Government have demonstrated, in their action over Comet, that if such a report highlights practices that should be investigated, they will be.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Other
David William Donald Cameron (Conservative, Centre-right): I am all for these debates, but you cannot have two minor parties without the third minor party. So I put the question to the right hon. Gentleman: why is he so frightened of debating with the Green party?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Other
David William Donald Cameron (Conservative, Centre-right): There are two credible sets of debates. You can either have a debate with all the national parties who appear in the House, or you can have a debate between two people, one of whom will become Prime Minister—or you can have both. Those are the credible debates. So I ask the right hon. Gentleman again: when he looks at the Green party, why is he so scared?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Other
Questions: At the Liaison Committee meeting on 16 December the Prime Minister promised to look into the full publication of the extensively redacted DEFRA report on shale gas rural economy impacts. Has he looked into this, and is he now going to insist on full and unredacted publication?
David William Donald Cameron (Conservative, Centre-right): I did look into the issue, and I do not want to give the hon. Gentleman an inaccurate answer so I will go and check on the action taken after that meeting and see what I can tell him.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: At the Liaison Committee meeting on 16 December the Prime Minister promised to look into the full publication of the extensively redacted DEFRA report on shale gas rural economy impacts. Has he looked into this, and is he now going to insist on full and unredacted publication?; In a speech last week the director general of MI5 identified a number of important gaps in its surveillance which need to be addressed in law. Some have called that a breach of civil liberties, and others have said that it is just another snoopers charter, but does the Prime Minister agree that public safety must come above everything else and that civil liberty must include not being bombed, shot or beheaded by some deranged jihadist?; Unemployment down 44%, youth unemployment down 45%, long-term unemployment down 44%, business start-ups up 31% and 800 apprenticeship starts—all in the last year in South Basildon and East Thurrock. What does my right hon. Friend think that says about our long-term economic plan?; Eliminating the deficit, net migration down to tens of thousands, no VAT rise, no top-down reorganisation of the NHS —why did the Prime Minister make these promises and why did he break them?; Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the past 12 months, more than 60 journalists have been killed in the course of their work, including those at Charlie Hebdo last week? Just five weeks ago, I and several other Members of Parliament attended the signing in Paris of a declaration by representatives of every European country, recognising the vital role of journalists in a free society and pledging to do everything possible to protect their safety. Will my right hon. Friend reaffirm that commitment today?
David William Donald Cameron (Conservative, Centre-right): I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work he does in supporting the freedom of the press and I certainly reiterate what he says today. This most struck me when I visited Jaffna, in northern Sri Lanka, and went to see a newspaper office that had been shot up, bombed and burned. That brings home what journalists in other countries have for years faced in bringing the truth and putting it in front of the people, which is a vital part of a free democratic system. Obviously, the events in Paris are truly horrific, and the duty of everyone in public life is not necessarily to say whether or not we agree with this or that being published—everyone can have their opinion; it is not that that matters. What matters is that we should always defend the right of people to publish whatever is within the law and in their opinion right to publish. That is our job and we must do it properly.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Mixed Topics
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): My right hon. and learned Friend is absolutely correct in his description of what the director general of MI5 said in the speech. It is unfortunate that people very often mix up some of the aspects of communications data and intercepts, and sometimes believe that the Government were trying, in the draft Communications Data Bill, to expand the powers of the agencies, which was not the case. Indeed, the director general of MI5 said: "The ability to access communications data is likewise vital to our ability to protect our national security", and that "unless we maintain this capability, our ability to protect the country will be eroded." The Bill was about maintaining that capability, and we and others, as evidenced by the quote, see that as so important.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Mixed Topics
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that everybody in this House needs to send a very clear message that we stand for freedom, including the freedom of the press, and democracy, and that we oppose the vile views that lead to the behaviour and incidents we saw in Paris. We must recognise that we have seen a number of terrorist attacks in this country over the years, the most recent of which was in 2013, when we saw not only Fusilier Lee Rigby’s murder, but the murder of Mohammed Saleem and the attempt to plant a number of bombs at mosques in the west midlands, which were undertaken by a far-right extremist. We must stand against terrorism and extremism in all their forms.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend’s comments. We stand alongside France against terror and for freedom and democracy. It was a very moving experience to be part of the march in Paris on Sunday not only because it involved so many people—nearly 4 million across France and an estimated 2 million in Paris—but because of the reaction of the people alongside the march, who constantly expressed their support for all those who were standing for freedom of the press and the freedoms of our democracy.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Mixed Topics
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): Discussions have taken place at official level with the devolved Administrations about the preparedness for an attack similar to that in Paris. Obviously we work very closely with the devolved Administrations. We worked particularly closely with the Scottish Government last year in preparation for the Commonwealth games, when we had some joint exercises. The co-operation and interaction between Police Scotland and the police forces in England and Wales are very good across a wide range of matters. Co-operation on the matters that we are discussing is obviously very important. We will continue to talk with the devolved Administrations at every level—ministerial and official—about these matters.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
Henry Bellingham (Conservative, Centre-right): Is the Home Secretary aware that when the Prophet Mohammed moved from Mecca to Medina all those years ago to establish the first Islamic state, he did not set up a sectarian caliphate, such as that demanded by the Paris murderers, but rather, under the charter of Medina, he created a multi-faith society, where Jews and Christians had the right to worship and were able to proclaim their faiths?
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for elucidating that fact for the House. It is very clear—everybody is very clear—that the attacks were not about Islam. The voices of Muslim communities and Muslim leaders in the United Kingdom, France and across the world have made it very clear that the attacks were not undertaken in their name. We should reiterate that very clear message.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. I do not wish to be unkind to the hon. Gentleman, but he is a trained barrister. Come on, cut to the chase. A lot of colleagues want to get in and I want to accommodate everybody. Ask a short question and then sit down.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. I am very keen to accommodate colleagues, but I remind the House that this is an Opposition day, with two well-subscribed debates to come, so what I am looking for now is Members who will ask a short question without preamble. I feel sure that the Home Secretary will provide us with her characteristically pithy replies.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): I agree with the hon. Lady that it is important that we reiterate the message that this is not about Islam; it is about a perversion of Islam. There are Muslims in this country and other countries around the world who condemn these acts of violence and terrorism, and their voices are being heard in increasing numbers. As I said, they are sending a clear message that this is not in their name. I also say to the hon. Lady that freedom of the press means freedom of the press.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Mixed Topics
Phillip James Lee (Conservative, Centre-right): Purveyors of extremism find fertile ground in communities that are not properly assimilated into the mainstream of society. Bearing that in mind, will the Home Secretary consider supporting the introduction of parts on compulsory written and spoken English into the British citizenship test? I believe that shared values and a shared language underpin a strong society, and particularly that if women in such communities were emancipated, they would help pacify young men who might be tempted to copy the extremist behaviour seen so graphically in Paris last week.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Immigration
Theresa Mary May (Conservative, Centre-right): The Government have of course increased the requirements for those coming into the United Kingdom to be able to speak and understand English. My hon. Friend mentions the role of women, and I share his view that it is important that we hear female voices from the Muslim community. I commend Sara Khan, who has once again stood up and spoken about that issue. In the latter part of last year I attended an inspirational event that she held as part of the #MakingAStand campaign that she was running with Muslim women around the country, saying that they wished to take a stand against those who were trying to radicalise young people in the Muslim community.
Terrorist Attacks (Paris) — House of Commons, 2015-01-14
Topic: Civil Rights
Paul Uppal (Conservative, Centre-right): I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement, particularly the words about tackling extreme ideology. May I ask her and the security services to be mindful of places of worship where mainstream, tolerant and open opinion can often be marginalised, creating a vacuum in which extremism thrives and creates the roots of so much poisonous ideology?