argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Education
Questions: Statutory child protection interventions are continuing to rise at record levels. What can the Minister do to ensure that such interventions are used only for high-risk cases, and not as an alternative to family support?; The national child abuse inquiry looked in detail at what happened to kids who behaved badly and were then put in children’s homes by magistrates courts. Today, the same children are excluded from schools and left to their own devices. What assessment has been made of the root causes of the behaviour that led to their exclusion?; How many secondary schools offer Mandarin as a language choice, and what can we do to increase the number of schools that offer it?; The University and College Union has described the Chancellor’s Budget as a “missed opportunity to…address the urgent financial challenges facing our education system”. Will the Minister agree to make representations to the Chancellor and ask him to follow the example of the Scottish Government by delivering a 5.1% real-terms increase in the next spending review?; Last year’s adjustment to the funding formula was a welcome first step towards fairer funding for counties such as my county of Staffordshire, but it was only a first step. Will the Minister please explain what more will be done in the coming years to ensure that that gap is narrowed?; At the weekend, Ofsted warned that gangs are slipping knives into children’s bags to get them expelled from school so that they can be recruited to carry drugs. Today, headteachers in London are told not to exclude too readily pupils with weapons, making them easy prey. The warning from Ofsted comes as the Children’s Commissioner, Anne Longfield, calls for the Government to fine schools that expel children. What is the Government’s response?; I was not happy with the Minister’s answer earlier, so maybe the Secretary of State can do better. Will the Government rule out charging higher tuition fees for STEM than for non-STEM subjects once the Augar review is complete?; Children in Hackney with special educational needs have had their support protected because Hackney Council found funding from other sources to backfill the cuts in Government funding, but after cuts of 40% to the borough’s budget, and with £30 million-worth of cuts still to come in the next four years, that is now being stretched. Will the Secretary of State commit to ensuring that children with special educational needs get the full support that they need for the rest of their lives?
Rachael Helen Maskell (Labour, Centre-left): Can the Secretary of State explain why York has the worst funded schools in the country, why Westfield Primary Community School and Tang Hall Primary School have had the greatest cuts and yet are in the most economically and socially deprived areas of my constituency, and why York therefore has the highest attainment gap in the country?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Education
Questions: Statutory child protection interventions are continuing to rise at record levels. What can the Minister do to ensure that such interventions are used only for high-risk cases, and not as an alternative to family support?; The national child abuse inquiry looked in detail at what happened to kids who behaved badly and were then put in children’s homes by magistrates courts. Today, the same children are excluded from schools and left to their own devices. What assessment has been made of the root causes of the behaviour that led to their exclusion?; How many secondary schools offer Mandarin as a language choice, and what can we do to increase the number of schools that offer it?; The University and College Union has described the Chancellor’s Budget as a “missed opportunity to…address the urgent financial challenges facing our education system”. Will the Minister agree to make representations to the Chancellor and ask him to follow the example of the Scottish Government by delivering a 5.1% real-terms increase in the next spending review?; Last year’s adjustment to the funding formula was a welcome first step towards fairer funding for counties such as my county of Staffordshire, but it was only a first step. Will the Minister please explain what more will be done in the coming years to ensure that that gap is narrowed?; At the weekend, Ofsted warned that gangs are slipping knives into children’s bags to get them expelled from school so that they can be recruited to carry drugs. Today, headteachers in London are told not to exclude too readily pupils with weapons, making them easy prey. The warning from Ofsted comes as the Children’s Commissioner, Anne Longfield, calls for the Government to fine schools that expel children. What is the Government’s response?; I was not happy with the Minister’s answer earlier, so maybe the Secretary of State can do better. Will the Government rule out charging higher tuition fees for STEM than for non-STEM subjects once the Augar review is complete?; Children in Hackney with special educational needs have had their support protected because Hackney Council found funding from other sources to backfill the cuts in Government funding, but after cuts of 40% to the borough’s budget, and with £30 million-worth of cuts still to come in the next four years, that is now being stretched. Will the Secretary of State commit to ensuring that children with special educational needs get the full support that they need for the rest of their lives?
Ruth Stephanie Nicole George (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Secretary of State share my concern and that of Members across the House that The Observer identified a £195 million overspend by councils on high needs in the last year? Will he actually respond to my request that he agreed to in the summer to meet me to discuss special educational needs and problems in Derbyshire?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Mohammed Afzal Khan (Labour, Centre-left): We have all read the reports that suggest that the Home Secretary is pressing for greater use of stop-and-search powers and amending the grounds of reasonable suspicion that currently govern stop and search. Does the Minister agree that that is, in effect, a move to random stop and search not based on evidence? [Hon. Members: "No!"] Okay. Is the Minister aware that the current policy, which he wants to remove, was introduced by one of the Home Secretary’s predecessors, who is now Prime Minister, and that she made that reform of police stop-and-search powers based on evidence, not on chasing easy headlines? Has the Home Secretary bothered to examine that evidence The use of the stop-and-search scheme was announced by the then Home Secretary in a statement to Parliament on 30 April 2014. She stated that the principal aims of the scheme were to achieve greater transparency and community involvement in the use of stop-and-search powers, and to support a more intelligence-led approach, leading to better outcomes. Is the Home Secretary aware of the very poor outcomes of the previous implementation of stop and search, and that the Home Office itself and the College of Policing, as well as Her Majesty’s inspector of constabulary, found that there were only 9% or 10% arrest rates from random stop and search? Does the Minister accept that this was a colossal waste of police resources? As a former police officer, I can tell him that that is the case. Is he aware that, according to his Department’s own research, black people are eight times more likely than white people to be stopped and searched, and Asian people are twice as likely Finally, intelligence-led stop and search does work. It is an important tool in the police arsenal. I am in favour of it. The Labour party is in favour of it. Random stop and search does not work, and the Minister has no evidence that it will. We do know, however, that it can poison community-police relations. Is he not trying to distract from the fact that knife crime is soaring under his Government, while they have cut 21,000 police officers?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have pulled a muscle in my back Intelligence-led policing starts at community level, so is it not therefore a shame that there was no money in the Budget to increase investment in community-led policing? They are the people who know who to stop and search at local level, and we need to see a return to effective local policing and more police in local neighbourhood teams.
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
David Lindon Lammy (Labour, Centre-left): I was first stopped and searched in the wake of the Scarman report aged 12, and it was so scary that I wet myself. We got to a place where the Home Office did a review that found there was no discernible, significant decrease in crime with the use of stop and search, and the current Prime Minister reached a cross-party consensus on the issue in the House. I caution the Minister against his party breaking that consensus, which would damage relations with Britain’s ethnic minorities once again. It is finding the drug dealers and gangsters, and dealing with cocaine, that will reduce the knife crime on our streets, as the Minister knows. Why have we cut the Border Force and what are we doing about the drug market in this country?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Janet Jessica Daby (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for confirming, or clarifying, that the Government have no plan to remove reasonable grounds for stop and search. However, I find it difficult to believe what he says that the police feel less confident about stop and search; the information I have is that they feel more confident because of body-worn cameras. What more will he do to reduce the negative impact of stop and search on young people, especially where they feel shame or embarrassment that they are perceived to be criminals? What more is he doing to build trust between the community and the police?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Katherine Anne Green (Labour, Centre-left): Greater Manchester police have stated that they have no numeric targets for stop and search or for an overall crime reduction that could be attributed to stop and search, because they believe that such targets, if they existed, could distort officer behaviour. Does the Minister agree? Will he confirm that perceived concerns about a reduced use of stop and search will not lead to a focus on quantity over quality in the future?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Conor Patrick McGinn (Labour, Centre-left): I am not being flippant when I say that people with my accent understand sensitivities relating to the use of police powers, but our chief constable and police and crime commissioner on Merseyside tell me that stop and search is a vital tool to combat serious crime. Its use by police officers has increased on Merseyside. Does the Minister agree that if it is intelligence-led, community-focused and proportionate, it should be encouraged, not least to combat knife crime in places such as St Helens?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): Surely the Minister must recognise that the only way we are going to deal adequately with violent crime, particularly in the west midlands, is by having an adequate number of police. We have lost 3,000 policemen over the past two or three years, and surely they have to be restored. More importantly, the police rely on intelligence, which is why we need more community policemen, as that is the best way to deal with crime.
Nuclear Power: Toshiba — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from the development of a nuclear power plant at Moorside in Cumbria.
Rebecca Long-Bailey (Labour, Centre-left): Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from Moorside is a blow to the UK’s energy security, its decarbonisation goals, and the economy of Cumbria. But let us be clear where the real responsibility lies. The Cumbrian chamber of commerce, and the GMB and Prospect trade unions, among others, have all laid the blame with this Government for their lack of clarity over funding and their ultimate failure to take a direct stake in Moorside—something that Labour has repeatedly committed to do So, first, will the Secretary of State reaffirm a promise made to the people of Copeland during last year’s by-election when they were told that voting Conservative would ensure a new nuclear plant at Moorside, and will he describe his plan for salvaging the development? Secondly, Moorside was projected to provide about 7% of the UK’s electricity. If the Secretary of State cannot commit to the future of Moorside, can he describe the contingency plans the Government have in place to guarantee the UK’s energy security Thirdly, the electricity produced by Moorside would be low-carbon, which is key to meeting the UK’s future carbon budgets, so if the Secretary of State cannot commit to the future of Moorside, can he describe what additional measures the Government will take to reduce the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions? Finally, what contingency plans does the Secretary of State have in place for the economic development of west Cumbria, to which Moorside would have brought a reported 6,000 jobs in the construction phase and 1,000 permanent jobs thereafter?
Nuclear Power: Toshiba — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from the development of a nuclear power plant at Moorside in Cumbria.
Rachel Jane Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): We are now entirely reliant on foreign investment to support new nuclear build in our country. If businesses abandon their plans, as Toshiba has done, that will affect the generation of new electricity supply and the costs borne ultimately by consumers. What is the Government’s alternative plan if foreign investors do not support the new nuclear build we need in the UK?
Nuclear Power: Toshiba — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from the development of a nuclear power plant at Moorside in Cumbria.
Martin David Whitfield (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Secretary of State. What consideration has been made of the wider impact of Toshiba’s decision on the UK nuclear industry and its supply chain? Does Toshiba’s decision put in doubt any other projects coming down the line?
Nuclear Power: Toshiba — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from the development of a nuclear power plant at Moorside in Cumbria.
Neil Coyle (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State says that he is talking to other investors in UK nuclear. Will he name which alternative companies he and the Department have approached since Toshiba’s decision, and will he follow up on the exploration by my hon. Friend the Member for Workington (Sue Hayman) of a positive intervention by CGN—China General Nuclear Power Group—to prevent the loss of skills, jobs and equities at Moorside?
Appointment of Sir Roger Scruton — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Government Operations
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you for granting the urgent question, Mr Speaker Across the country and in the House, there have been considerable concerns about the appointment of Sir Roger Scruton, especially as his views have become more widely known. Can the Secretary of State confirm that, as part of the appointment process, he was made aware of Sir Roger’s previously expressed views? If he was, what consideration did he give to those views in relation to Sir Roger’s suitability for such an important post? If he was not, is he not just a bit embarrassed that due process was not followed?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Marsha Chantol De Cordova (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In her statement on Monday 5 November 2018, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions listed a number of organisations, including Mind and Gingerbread, that had welcomed changes to universal credit, saying that they believed the Department was now listening, but the charities were forced to set the record straight. Instead of welcoming the changes as the Secretary of State suggested, Mind has said that it needs MPs to vote against the regulations, which will create a real risk for people living with mental health issues. How can it be that the same charities that the Government claim to have listened to on the regulations are asking MPs to vote them down Can you advise me on how to ensure that the Secretary of State corrects her statement to accurately represent the views of the charities that she mentioned?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Ruth Stephanie Nicole George (Labour, Centre-left): The Conservative party came to power in 2010 promising to eliminate the deficit by 2015. Not only has it not done that, but it has doubled this country’s debt and brought public services to their knees. Is the Minister claiming that this project has been a success?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Wesley Paul William Streeting (Labour, Centre-left): What the Financial Secretary has neglected to mention but the Treasury Committee has heard clearly is that in respect of the long-run impact of the tax and benefit changes under this Government since 2015 alone—putting the coalition to one side—it is clear that their successive policies have left the wealthy better off and the very poorest worse off. That is deeply regressive and unjustifiable and it is why the Bill should not be supported.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Labor
Siobhain Ann McDonagh (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for giving way. Does he agree that abolition of certain restrictions in the labour market, such as payment between assignment contracts, would also increase people’s wages? Will he be making a statement on the Taylor review and its contribution to this debate?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Environment
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): The Financial Secretary may be going to touch on this, but I will ask him the question anyway. He has not said much about investment in climate change technology. There is a lot of concern among scientists about the effect of climate change. Can he give us any indication of how the Government are investing in this technology?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Environment
Mary Helen Creagh (Labour, Centre-left): On that point, the Government’s failure to introduce a latte levy on single-use disposable coffee cups and bottles or to introduce a tax on virgin plastic until 2022 means that 700,000 tonnes of plastic packaging will be thrown away before 2022. Is that what the Financial Secretary means by making sure that the polluter pays in tackling climate change?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Education
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): It is not in the Finance Bill. Frankly, the hon. Gentleman should worry more about the 8% cut to per pupil school funding in his constituency than trying to get me to answer questions that the Government should be answering.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): From a sedentary position my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds) says that one in four policemen have gone from his constituency. That is similar to what has happened in my constituency and, I suspect, in the hon. Lady’s constituency. There is not one penny more of day-to-day spending in the Budget. She should be asking her Government why the police are still being underfunded.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Ruth Stephanie Nicole George (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree that the huge rise in council tax for council tax payers on every level of income is a highly regressive form of tax? In my Derbyshire constituency, people are having to pay more council tax for fewer police.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): Look, we are always prepared to look at any idea, but we are trying to deal with the problem today. We are trying to deal now with the hundreds of thousands of elderly people who are not getting the service they are entitled to.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): The Government have apparently suggested that we should have a cross-party talk to resolve the issue of social care. They were offered that chance by the Labour Government before the 2010 election and they turned that opportunity down. Let us set the record straight. Tory Members talk about Labour Governments leaving office with high unemployment, but the Major Government left 3 million people unemployed. We introduced the minimum wage, and they said it would lead to 3 million people unemployed.