argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Local Government Finance (England) — House of Commons, 2016-02-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Roberta Carol Blackman-Woods (Labour, Centre-left): I am not going to give way to the hon. Gentleman, because he would not take an intervention from me The only north-east council to benefit from the £150 million additional funding announced on Monday is Northumberland. That is staggering, especially as Durham is also a substantially rural area. It is odd, then, that Northumberland is the only council to benefit from the rural fund. Indeed, if we look across the country, the areas to benefit most are Surrey, with £11.9 million; Hampshire, with £9.4 million; North Yorkshire, with £9.2 million; and Devon, with £8.3 million. Examples of the reduction in core spending tell a similar story: Durham had a reduction of minus 4.1%; Newcastle minus 4.4%; and Sunderland minus 4.3%. Compare that with Surrey, which has a decrease of only minus 1.1% and North Yorkshire minus 0.3%.
Local Government Finance (England) — House of Commons, 2016-02-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): It is pleasure to contribute to this debate. First, I wish to pay tribute to all local councillors, of all political parties and none, for the work that they do in the world of local government, making sure that local services are provided to the people we represent in Parliament. They do an incredible job in difficult circumstances. I say that having been a councillor on Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council for 12 years. My wife has been a Tameside councillor for 16 years, and I know the very difficult decisions she and her colleagues are having to make at the moment My constituency is served by two borough councils. They are very different in their socioeconomic and demographic, and political make-ups, but both are having to deal with tough—although different—spending decisions. Stockport contains the two Reddish wards in my constituency. Tameside would love to have Stockport’s settlement and its council tax base. Nevertheless, the cuts are biting hard in Stockport and I wish to make a few comments on behalf of the borough council. It says it is: "Surprised at extent to which council tax growth is assumed in the government’s figures which…fail to acknowledge the spending pressures arising from government induced changes (e.g national living wage, NI increases and apprenticeship levy)." It would be good if the Minister could respond to some of those points. Although Stockport Council welcomes "certain aspects of the settlement, insofar as it is not as bad as it might have been" it is "under no illusions as to the scale of the financial challenges that face the Council" It says that it will have to "take full advantage of the newly granted flexibility to increase council tax." I wish to make the point again that Tameside’s council has a £16 million social care deficit this year. It is now restricted to providing just critical and substantial care, which is statutory. That means the council still has to find the money to close that £16 million gap. Given that social care amounts to 60% of the council’s overall budget yet it serves only 4% of the residents of the borough, that money has to be found from the services everybody else takes for granted. I do not wish to repeat many of the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Jenny Chapman), but Tameside’s council is in a pretty similar position, in that its grounds maintenance, parks, road repairs and street cleaning are what is being literally—
Notification of Arrest of Members — House of Commons, 2016-02-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Melanie Onn (Labour, Centre-left): No Member of this House or the other place is above the law—nor should they ever consider themselves to be so. The reach of the law extends within the House, and Parliament would not seek to interfere with due process of a criminal investigation. Similarly, as the law applies to us all equally, so does the right to privacy Given that we are public servants, it is right that notification to the House would still take place in respect of matters such as imprisonment or remanding in custody; sentence of imprisonment; conviction of illegal or corrupt practice at a parliamentary election; and conviction of an offence relating to an MP’s expenses I would, however, like to ask about the practicality of the proposed measures, and I shall direct my questions to the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Mr Walker) as Chairman of the Procedure Committee. I believe that to be the correct process. Does the Committee believe that the event of a Member of Parliament being arrested will be kept from the public domain as a direct result of these procedural changes? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that in the modern era of social media, it is increasingly likely that such information would quickly reach the public domain On the effect of social media, rumours very often take on a life of their own and become widely accepted truth before the interested party has a chance to respond. Does the hon. Gentleman consider that, with the removal of the duty to notify of the arrest of Members to the House, that it could be more difficult for an individual to counter rumours of such an arrest I was interested to see that no notifications of arrest were made to the House for 30 years—from 1978 until 2008. Were no Members arrested during that time, or is there already a system available that allows the Speaker or Clerk to exercise discretion in these matters Under these proposals, it is specified that Members who are arrested are not to be prevented from notifying the House of their detention. Can the hon. Gentleman say how this can be ensured It is intended that police forces will be required to notify the Chief Superintendent at Parliament of the arrest of any Member within 24 hours. How will information about that new procedure be circulated to police forces, and how will it be enforceable Can the hon. Gentleman provide examples of what he considers would fall within parliamentary privilege, or would be of constitutional significance, that would require the House to be automatically notified of a Member’s arrest, and can he explain how parliamentary privilege or constitutional significance would have affected the notification of arrests made in the past 10 years The recommendations in the Procedure Committee’s report rely on protections enshrined in the Human Rights Act 1998, which I thought the Government wanted to repeal. Why are they more than happy to employ the Act to protect their own rights, while wishing to remove it from the British people?
Notification of Arrest of Members — House of Commons, 2016-02-10
Topic: Civil Rights
John Mann (Labour, Centre-left): I hate to break the consensus, but we have been here before when it comes to House business. I recall moving a resolution—but not getting a seconder—to stop the flipping of homes, some 18 months before the expenses scandal. If I had been listened to then, some Members might not be here today because others might well have survived; I suppose that outcome was rather double-edged. The reputation of Parliament might also have been partly salvaged if that resolution had been listened to, but it was not On this motion, I listened to the non-answer given to the hon. Member for North East Somerset (Mr Rees-Mogg). I have a question about the impact on the British overseas territories if this goes through. Plenty of Parliaments across the world, not least those in the Commonwealth, listen to and watch what we do, and they copy and emulate it. We are not just talking about a possibility in some future stage of less democratic times under this Government. Plenty of Members of Parliament have been arrested and disappear, and it still happens to this day. They are taken by regimes citing the law, and therefore decisions we make have to be thought through for their consequences Ironically, the first name on the motion is that of the Leader of the House of Commons, the right hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling). He is citing the human rights law here, but he is the man in Cabinet demanding we get rid of the human rights law. It seems that the rest of the country, including my constituents, can have no human rights, but we will create some extra ones tonight for Members of Parliament—exclusively. That is precisely what this proposal does. It says that MPs will give themselves some special rights in law that do not apply to everybody else, and that is wrong. That principle is wrong and that practice is wrong. Until the question, theoretical though it may be, is properly answered, which it has not been, this becomes a double-edged sword in law for us as well. If people wish to change the law in relation to what happens when people are arrested, they should change the law. There is plenty of time in the parliamentary agenda for people to change the law. There are plenty of opportunities for the Government to change the law. This is not the way to change it for Members of Parliament, and therefore we should oppose this proposal.
SMEs — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): The Welsh steel industry plays a critical role in underpinning business right across the board, including SMEs, but global headwinds affecting the industry have been growing stronger. Will the Secretary of State join me and Welsh MPs from all parties in asking for a meeting with his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills to ensure that no stone remains unturned in the fight to save the Welsh steel industry?
Swansea Tidal Lagoon — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christina Elizabeth Rees (Labour, Centre-left): Local businesses across Wales are eagerly anticipating the investment that the tidal lagoon will bring. It would be a travesty if the UK Government were to pull the plug on the lagoon, so can the Minister confirm that they remain committed to the project and to agreeing a strike price for the tidal lagoon?
Swansea Tidal Lagoon — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Ifor Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Centre-left): Swansea bay tidal lagoon and the other potential lagoons that may result from it provide amazing opportunities for exports of intellectual property, technology and supply chains across south Wales. Will the Secretary of State at least commit to making it happen and doing it as soon as possible?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Housing
Questions: The No. 1 responsibility of any Government is the protection of their people. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain’s nuclear deterrent and our membership of NATO are key to our defences and that any moves that would put that at risk would jeopardise our national security?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): This week the Prime Minister rather belatedly acknowledged there is a housing crisis in Britain. He announced a £140 million fund to transform 100 housing estates around the country, which amounts to £1.4 million per housing estate to bulldoze and then rebuild them. [Interruption.] My maths is perfect. This money is a drop in the ocean. It is not even going to pay for the bulldozers, is it?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Housing
Questions: The No. 1 responsibility of any Government is the protection of their people. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain’s nuclear deterrent and our membership of NATO are key to our defences and that any moves that would put that at risk would jeopardise our national security?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister has not thought this through very carefully. Every estate that he announces he wishes to bulldoze will include tenants and people who have bought their homes under right to buy. Will those people, the leaseholders, be guaranteed homes on the rebuilt estates he proposes?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Housing
Questions: The No. 1 responsibility of any Government is the protection of their people. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain’s nuclear deterrent and our membership of NATO are key to our defences and that any moves that would put that at risk would jeopardise our national security?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I notice that the Prime Minister did not give any guarantee to leaseholders on estates. I have a question to ask on behalf of a probably larger group on most estates. A tenant by the name of Darrell asks: "Will the Prime Minister guarantee that all existing tenants of the council estates earmarked for redevelopment will be rehoused in new council housing, in their current communities, with the same tenancy conditions as they currently have?"
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Housing
Questions: The No. 1 responsibility of any Government is the protection of their people. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain’s nuclear deterrent and our membership of NATO are key to our defences and that any moves that would put that at risk would jeopardise our national security?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister does not seem to understand the very serious concerns that council tenants have when they feel they are going to be forced away from strong communities in which they live and their children go to school. Perhaps the Prime Minister will be able to help us with another issue. His party’s manifesto said: "Everyone who works hard should be able to own a home of their own" Will families earning the Prime Minister’s so-called national living wage be able to afford one of his discount starter homes?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Housing
Questions: The No. 1 responsibility of any Government is the protection of their people. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain’s nuclear deterrent and our membership of NATO are key to our defences and that any moves that would put that at risk would jeopardise our national security?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I hope that that word "hope" goes a long way, because research by Shelter has found that families on the Prime Minister’s living wage will be unable to afford the average starter home in 98% of local authority areas in England—only 2% may benefit. Rather than building more affordable homes, is the Prime Minister not simply branding more homes affordable, which is not a solution to the housing crisis? Will he confirm that home ownership has actually fallen since he became Prime Minister?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Housing
Questions: The No. 1 responsibility of any Government is the protection of their people. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain’s nuclear deterrent and our membership of NATO are key to our defences and that any moves that would put that at risk would jeopardise our national security?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I thank Conservative Back Benchers for their deep concern about the housing crisis in this country. It is noted The Prime Minister has given no assurances to tenants, no assurances to leaseholders, and no assurances to low-paid people who want to find somewhere decent to live. May I ask him one final question? It is a practical question that is faced by many people throughout the country who are deeply worried about their own housing situation and how they are going to live in the future, and it comes from Linda, who has been a council tenant for the last 25 years. She says: "I will eventually look to downsize to a property suitable for our ageing circumstances. Due to the housing bill being debated at present, if we downsize we will have to sign a new tenancy agreement. If we stay, we face having to pay the bedroom tax and debt. If we downsize, we lose our secure home." Linda and many like her are facing a real problem. If she were in the Prime Minister’s advice bureau, what advice would he give her?
Trade, Exports, Innovation and Productivity — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Deborah Angela Elspeth Marie Abrahams (Labour, Centre-left): The Federation of Small Businesses report on productivity identifies late payments to small businesses as one of the key issues. Will the Minister commit to addressing cash retention in the construction industry—a key issue that is due to come before us again in the Enterprise Bill?
Trade, Exports, Innovation and Productivity — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
William Roffen Esterson (Labour, Centre-left): Of course the Minister is right that the price has halved, but other countries in the EU chose to intervene while we said we would not. I am afraid the Government’s record on this has been woeful.
Trade, Exports, Innovation and Productivity — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): I think the right hon. Lady knows it is entirely up to the hon. Member who made the statement whether he wishes to withdraw it or correct the record. She has herself now twice corrected the record, so we shall move on.
Trade, Exports, Innovation and Productivity — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is making an interesting and important point about foreign takeovers, particularly hostile takeovers. One of the important ones recently was Pfizer’s attempt to take over AstraZeneca. I am sure he agrees that that case concluded in absolutely the right way, by protecting one of the great British assets and enabling it to continue its long-term strategies of investment in innovation and technology. Does he agree that this issue should perhaps be seen as a case for reform of the Companies Act 2006, so that we see far more long-termism built into the UK’s corporate culture and a move towards investing in innovation, R and D, and skills? If we do not do that, we will never change to a more sustainable business model.
Trade, Exports, Innovation and Productivity — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Before I call the next speaker, I note that time is getting a bit tight. I will not put a time limit on, but if Members restrict themselves to 10 minutes, I will be able to get everybody in.
Trade, Exports, Innovation and Productivity — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Adrian Edward Bailey (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Lady is quite at liberty to do so. I welcome the investment in Taunton, but I would welcome that investment even more if we could have it in the black country, which is the heart of British manufacturing Let me conclude by saying that we need a strong Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, we need an industrial policy and we need other Departments signed up to the priorities that will ultimately deliver on our exports and on our productivity, and that will get the tax revenues, which will enable those Departments to invest in their particular priorities. That is not happening at the moment.
Catastrophic Sporting Injuries: Steven Cox — House of Commons, 2016-01-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alan Campbell (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful for the opportunity to raise the case of my constituent Steven Cox, a young man who received catastrophic injuries during a rugby match almost 10 years ago to the day. I want to preface my remarks by saying that this is not a campaign against rugby or against contact sport. I accept and welcome the fact that thousands of my constituents, and millions of people across our country, watch and play rugby. I have a number of successful rugby clubs in my constituency, including Rockcliff, Percy Park and North Shields. I acknowledge that catastrophic injuries occur, and not just in rugby. Thankfully, they are quite rare, but they do happen too often. I believe, and Steven Cox believes, that when they do happen, they should be investigated properly and lessons should be learned, in the hope that the game can be made safer for those who follow it Steven Cox was 21 years old when he was catastrophically injured. He was a Durham University student, and was playing for St Chad’s College against St Cuthbert’s. It was an evening match held at Durham City rugby football club ground. Steven was playing tighthead prop in the front row of the right-hand side in the scrum. St Chad’s were losing an eagerly contested match; by all accounts the St Cuthbert’s team were heavier and stronger. The match was nearing the end of the second half when a scrum was called. What happened next is, to an extent, contentious, not least in terms of the speed of the engagement of the teams and how it was called. What we do know is that when the front rows came together, Steven was forced up and out of the scrum, before going to ground having sustained a serious neck injury. He was taken to University Hospital of North Durham and then transferred to a specialist unit in Newcastle general hospital. Steven had two major operations; two of his vertebrae were crushed. In stark terms, he lost the use of his limbs. He has to use a wheelchair and is significantly disabled.
Overseas Territories: Registers of Beneficial Ownership — House of Commons, 2016-02-23
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Questions: By what date he expects to have set a timetable for overseas territories with financial centres to adopt central registers of beneficial ownership or similarly effective systems.
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): In April 2014, the Prime Minister said: "I believe that beneficial ownership and public access to a central register is key to improving the transparency of company ownership and vital to meeting the urgent challenges of illicit finance and tax evasion." Nearly two years have passed and there still appears to be no timetable for transparency arrangements in respect of the financial centres. Why is that?
Overseas Territories: Registers of Beneficial Ownership — House of Commons, 2016-02-23
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Questions: By what date he expects to have set a timetable for overseas territories with financial centres to adopt central registers of beneficial ownership or similarly effective systems.
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister tell the House the exact date by which he expects overseas territory financial centres to ensure that there are proper transparency arrangements, or will we continue to hear more excuses for inaction in the years to come?
Mental Health Taskforce — House of Commons, 2016-02-23
Topic: Housing
Joan Marie Ryan (Labour, Centre-left): The taskforce emphasises the importance of supported housing for people with mental health problems. I think it is right to say that the Minister’s Department made no representations to the Treasury before the changes to housing benefit for tenants in supported housing were announced. It had made no official representations to other Departments as recently as three weeks ago. Will the Minister now make the case to his colleagues in the Departments for Communities and Local Government and for Work and Pensions on the need to exempt vulnerable people from the changes in housing benefit?
Mental Health Taskforce — House of Commons, 2016-02-23
Topic: Other
Conor Patrick McGinn (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister welcomed the work of the taskforce and its comprehensive report. I agree entirely. He said that he would seek to implement the measures in a rolling programme, but can we infer from that that he is committed to implementing all the measures and that he fully accepts all the recommendations?