argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): I am always grateful for your wise guidance, Madam Deputy Speaker I first presented this Bill on 5 September 2017. Since then, we have had an in-depth three-hour debate in Westminster Hall on 7 January this year about televising leaders’ debates. I should like to thank my hon. Friends the Members for Crawley (Henry Smith), for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope), for Shipley (Philip Davies) and for St Austell and Newquay (Steve Double), and my right hon. Friend the Member for Tatton (Ms McVey), who have co-sponsored my Bill. I also want to thank those who participated in the 7 January debate, and Sky News for its e-petition I should also like to welcome the excellent Minister, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere (Oliver Dowden), to the Dispatch Box. His skill, integrity and help are appreciated across the House. I always find that it is best to say these things at this stage, because then I might get some help, but in this case, it happens to be true. I also welcome the excellent shadow Minister. I should also like to thank those who work in my office: Harriet Butcher, who helped to prepare this speech; Helen Harrison, who drafted the Bill; and Jordan Ayres, who did the research. I also want to thank the Clerks for all their help It might be of help if I say at this early stage that I will not be pressing my Bill to a Division. There is clearly not enough parliamentary time in this Session for it to become law. I am also aware that there are many other Bills that Members wish to debate today. What I hope to achieve today is that the Government will accept the principle of my Bill and introduce a similar one in the next Queen’s Speech The Westminster Hall debate came about due to e-petition 228572, entitled "Make TV election debates happen: establish an independent debates mission", which was started by Mr Jonathan Levy. Mr Levy is the director of news gathering and operations at Sky News, and his petition has collected more than 140,000 signatures in only six months. This shows that although the idea might not be—how can I put it—particularly sexy at a time when we are discussing Brexit and other matters, it is still well supported by members of the public I also thank Adam Boulton, editor-at-large at Sky News, for promoting the Sky News petition, keeping it in the public eye and maintaining pressure, via his excellent "All Out Politics" programme. His work has undoubtedly boosted support and raised public awareness. All the broadcasters have shown support for televised leaders’ debates, but they have left it to Sky News to be proactive and lead the campaign. However, there can be no doubt that all broadcasters believe that televised leaders’ debates should form an important part of a general election.
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Neil John O'Brien (Conservative, Centre-right): I just want to put on the record my total opposition to leaders’ debates. They are trivialising and superficial, and we have a parliamentary system, not a presidential system. Each debate that has happened so far has actually reduced the amount of serious debate during an election campaign. I am totally opposed to leaders’ debates, and I hope that we never have them ever again.
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention, and I will consider carefully whether I agree—no, that is a complete load of rubbish. I respect his view, but it is very much an establishment view.
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Neil John O'Brien (Conservative, Centre-right): How does my hon. Friend propose to establish the support in the country for such non-parliamentary parties? Would we look at opinion polls, or would we simply put our finger in the air? It seems entirely arbitrary.
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Civil Rights
Matthew Robert Warman (Conservative, Centre-right): Would the commission consider what sanctions would be applied if leaders did not take part in these compulsory debates? I know my hon. Friend has had an up-and-down relationship with our current Prime Minister, but he is surely not suggesting she would need to go to prison if she said no.
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Michael Jon Wood (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my hon. Friend feel that, on the occasions when there is an opportunity to ask difficult questions of the Prime Minister, she is generally more discomfited by questions from the Leader of the Opposition or from himself?
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): I omitted to point that out in my speech. The reason is that there are effectively two polling days—the day when the postal votes go out, and the day of the general election—so one of the debates would be close to the general election and one would be when the postal votes go out. I am sorry if I did not make that clear.
General Election (Leaders’ Debate) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): The debate has concluded, but I hesitate to put the Question, as the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) has indicated that he wishes to withdraw his Bill. Does he seek leave to withdraw the motion?
Green Belt (Protection) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): Absolutely, and that is inherent in what I am trying to establish, which is a national register of green-belt land and national responsibility for its protection and maintenance, rather than putting pressure on local authorities to erode the green belt at a local level. The Government are intent on forcing local authorities to bring forward land for development, and effectively allowing developers a free-for-all To illustrate my concern, let me give some data from Christchurch, which in 2014 had 3,480 hectares of green-belt land. Since then, 210 hectares have been removed—a 7% loss in four years. Since 2014, 160 hectares have been lost in East Dorset District Council, which is partly in my constituency, principally in and around the West Parley and Longham communities. As we speak, local councils are openly inviting bids from owners of green-belt land to offer it up for de-designation and consequent development, meaning that all green-belt land is now vulnerable to losing its protected status. That point was made strongly to me at a meeting last month with Longham residents association. People there who bought houses in the expectation that they would be protected by being in the green belt now find that they no longer have the assurance of that protected designation Clause 1 of the Bill is designed to require even greater transparency about the loss of green-belt land. The Campaign to Protect Rural England has been doing a great job, but a national public register of all green-belt land in England, and all land removed from or added to the green belt, would increase that transparency. Clause 2 seeks to remove the incentives for local authorities to de-designate green-belt land, as it would allow that only if alternative land of the same or greater area was added at the same time. The replacement land would need to abut land that is already developed, or that has above average density of housing. Thereby, the new green-belt land would increase that amenity for those living adjacent to it. Most importantly, the Bill would restrict the density of development on former green-belt land. That would be a disincentive to developers to develop green-belt land rather than brownfield land.
Green Belt (Protection) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): I do not have time to take interventions. As I said, this issue is important for the people of Christchurch. I do not have time to develop the whole argument now. I thought we were reaching the end of this Session, but no date has yet been given for Prorogation. I think the best thing is for me to talk a little more over the course of the next quarter of a minute to ensure that the Bill can be held over to another day, so that this very important subject can be further debated and the Minister has the chance to prepare his response.
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Justine Greening (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. All this week, this House has done nothing but debate Brexit. Children and young people are today protesting about what they perceive to be a lack of action on climate change. That strikes at the heart of a Parliament that too many people feel is not able to make progress on Bills and issues that will make a big difference to their lives. We have just seen Bills objected to and stopped that could have made a difference to people’s lives. My Bill, which could help 15 million renters to get a better credit score by having their rent included, has just been objected to. Can you advise me on how we can reform private Members’ Bills day, so that this House can actually allow Members to do what they were elected to do, which is change people’s lives for the better?
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the right hon. Lady for her point of order, which is very reasonable. Her observations are shared across the House by a great many Members. I must point out as a matter of fact that today we have passed three important Bills in this Chamber. In my observations from the Chair, I feel very strongly that it is extremely unfortunate that the perception of business in this Chamber and the work of Members of Parliament is wrongly coloured by descriptions in the press that all we do is talk about one particular issue. Every elected Member knows that there is an enormous amount of work going on on behalf of our constituents, both behind the scenes and in this Chamber I repeat that this very day three pieces of legislation have come into being which will make an actual difference to the lives of many, many people and many communities. I do not, however, negate the point the right hon. Lady makes. I know that the Chairman of the Procedure Committee is well aware of the background description she has given the House, and that he is looking at these matters.
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. As a member of the Procedure Committee, I confirm that that is exactly what is happening: the Procedure Committee is looking into this issue. I sympathise with what my right hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Justine Greening) said about so many days in this House having been wasted—not in the last week, but in previous weeks, when the House rose early and important Bills could have been discussed. We know that where there is a will, there is a way and that on two occasions during this Session, the Government have taken on Bills that they regard as important from private Members’ business. The Government have adopted those Bills and enabled them to get on to the statute book, so I urge my right hon. Friend to make her representations to the Government, because they have oodles of time on their hands and could easily take over her Bill and ensure that it reaches the statute book in the way that she wishes.
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2019-03-15
Topic: Other
Justine Greening (Conservative, Centre-right): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I should inform the House that I did indeed speak personally with the Prime Minister to get Government support for this Bill. That was a couple of weeks ago and I have not heard anything further since.
Veterans: Recognition — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Public Lands
Penelope Mary Mordaunt (Conservative, Centre-right): I certainly join the hon. Gentleman in congratulating that organisation and all the organisations across the country that are not just looking after historic monuments to and commemorations of our armed forces, but ensuring that the history of those individuals is properly recorded. Support for different memorials is split across Government Departments, and local government is involved, as obviously is the Commonwealth War Graves Commission for certain memorials. If he writes to me about the specifics, I will ensure that the relevant Department hears his plea.
Veterans: Recognition — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Penelope Mary Mordaunt (Conservative, Centre-right): I would be very happy to look at the cases of those two individuals. It is vital that we have a clear line of sight on what is happening with individual cases. We still need to make improvements to veterans support, and part of the problem relates to the need for continuity and to ensure proactively that people are getting the care they need.
Veterans: Universal Credit — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Tobias Martin Ellwood (Conservative, Centre-right): As veterans are civilians, the majority of care comes from other Government Departments and devolved Administrations. The Ministry of Defence works closely with other stakeholders to target and improve veterans’ access to services, including those who are eligible for universal credit.
Veterans: Universal Credit — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Tobias Martin Ellwood (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman raises this matter almost weekly, but he misses the point. We ensure that we look after our veterans and they know whether they are eligible for universal credit. We do that by ensuring synergy and joint working between the Department for Work and Pensions and the Ministry of Defence, not just in this area but in health and education and right across the piece. The armed forces can push these issues forward. We need to hold Government Departments to account and we do that through the Veterans Board.
Veterans: Universal Credit — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): For the benefit of people observing our proceedings who are not Members of the House I would simply add, non-pejoratively, that raising something weekly in the Chamber is a very modest effort. Raising things daily, or in some cases several times a day, is by no means unknown in, or condemned by, the House of Commons. It is perfectly normal.
Veterans: Monitoring Schemes — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Immigration
Tobias Martin Ellwood (Conservative, Centre-right): Our resettlement programmes continue to develop to ensure that the transition from service to civilian life for all personnel is conducted as smoothly as possible. I am sure that my hon. Friend will join me in welcoming the fact that 95% of personnel who participate in our career transition programme are in work or education within six months of departure.
UK Personnel: Local Support Services — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Other
Tobias Martin Ellwood (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman for the tone in which he has raised this matter. He had the courtesy to raise it before questions. I should be delighted to meet him afterwards to see whether we can bring about some reconciliation, and make this work.
Mental Health Provision — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Civil Rights
Michael Alex Burghart (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the Minister for that response and congratulate the Government on what they are doing. Will the Minister set out what steps his Department is taking in order to achieve that parity of esteem, which is so important to serving personnel?
VE and VJ Days: Anniversary — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Other
Penelope Mary Mordaunt (Conservative, Centre-right): The nation will be forever grateful to the greatest generation, who lived and fought through the second world war. The Government will provide opportunities to mark the 75th anniversaries of both VE and VJ Days next year. The move of the May bank holiday to Friday 8 May has already been announced, and planning is under way for the commemorative events. Details will follow very soon.
VE and VJ Days: Anniversary — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
David Anthony Andrew Amess (Conservative, Centre-right): I am absolutely delighted with my right hon. Friend’s announcement, but will she please reassure me that equal expenditure and prominence will be given to VJ Day? These heroes have been forgotten for too long, as the late Lord Louis Mountbatten said, and they suffered terrible atrocities in the Japanese prisoner of war camps.
VE and VJ Days: Anniversary — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Penelope Mary Mordaunt (Conservative, Centre-right): I completely agree with my hon. Friend. The events are tailored in regard to their tone and scale and the number of people attending them, and we might not be able to guarantee that the cost will be split exactly between the two events. That might differ, but the prominence of the events will not differ. That will be the same.
Defence Procurement: Jobs — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stuart James Andrew (Conservative, Centre-right): I was looking at the two right hon. Gentlemen and wondering whether it was more like Waldorf and Statler, but I will not be so rude—although I have just have been. The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: when we look at the contracts, not just for the shipbuilding but for the content within, there are huge opportunities for the UK supply chain, where much more of the value exists. I recognised that in his all-party group’s recent report, and his and other right hon. and hon. Members’ work will inform much of the decision making on our future policy.
Royal Fleet Auxiliary — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Mark Lancaster (Conservative, Centre-right): Members of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary are MOD civil servants. Their terms and conditions, including their pay, are subject to civilian rules for the wider public sector. As such, pay is subject to HM Treasury civil servant pay guidance. The Royal Fleet Auxiliary continues to engage with the maritime trade unions and has further meetings planned to discuss pay.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Housing
Questions: Will my right hon Friend join me in thanking the North Staffordshire armed forces committee, the Queen’s Park Partnership and everybody who took part in the recent Armed Forces Day celebrations at Queen’s Park in my constituency?; One area where the MOD has been performing well is on diversity in LGBT circles. I am sure the Secretary of State will join me in welcoming the contribution of so many armed forces personnel, and indeed MOD civil servants, at the Pride march in London on Saturday, where I was alongside them. Many of them were proudly wearing campaign medals. However, I have to share the concern of my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Nia Griffith), because when I looked at recruitment figures for my constituency I saw that there was very little recruitment from black and minority ethnic, and ethnically and religiously diverse, areas. Does the Secretary of State agree that much more needs to be done on that if we are to have truly representative armed forces?; Given the increasing threat that drones pose to our national security, as recently highlighted by the insightful BBC documentary “Britain’s Next Air Disaster”, what assessment has my right hon. Friend made of our armed forces’ ability to respond to a potential drone strike, and what investment is her Department making in new technology to rapidly neutralise such threats?>; Inspirational charities such as Combat Stress and Greater Manchester-based Veterans Garage tackle issues such as depression and social isolation in our former servicemen and women. What assessment has the Minister made of the barriers veterans could face on their return to civilian life?; For all the warm words from the Armed Forces Minister about Army recruitment moving in the right direction, is the truth not that for every single year we have had a Conservative Government the size of the fully trained Army has been smaller than the year before? Is it not time that he confronted the reality we are facing and stopped trying to kid people that this is moving in the right direction?; Too many military personnel continue to live in substandard housing, despite the Government spending £135 million on refurbishment, so what more can they do to make sure our armed forces get the standard of accommodation they deserve?; With the latest NHS statistics identifying that about 60 veterans a day are seeking professional assistance for mental health issues, what steps is the Department taking to ensure that our service personnel receive the tailored, bespoke mental health services they need and deserve?; Will my right hon. Friend update the House on the future role of our F-35 jets, given the successful completion of their first operation?
Tobias Martin Ellwood (Conservative, Centre-right): No, the purpose of the future accommodation model is to provide opportunity and a series of options, whether people live inside the wire, rent or get on the housing ladder. That will enable us to attract more people to join the armed forces.
UK Ambassador to USA: Leaked Emails — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the leaks from the UK ambassador’s office in Washington.
Alan James Carter Duncan (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank my hon. Friend for his comments and supportive statements over the weekend. I share his deep concerns about this unacceptable leak for exactly the reasons that he has clearly set out, and I reassure him that it is being treated with the full seriousness that it deserves. There will be a cross-Government investigation, led by the Cabinet Office. Obviously it is not for me to prejudge the inquiry, but I can assure him, and the House, that it will be comprehensive and that, as with all leak inquiries, it will endeavour to report its findings clearly—and if evidence of criminality is found, then yes, the police could be involved. The most important focus is to establish who is responsible for this despicable leak Again, I am grateful that my hon. Friend’s experience in the Army and in international affairs has been able to lend a voice of authority to the condemnation that we should all wish to express.
UK Ambassador to USA: Leaked Emails — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Other
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the leaks from the UK ambassador’s office in Washington.
Alan James Carter Duncan (Conservative, Centre-right): I have to say to the right hon. Gentleman that I have been rather puzzled over the weekend about what the motivation could be, because any kind of scenario I put into my head does not seem to add up. On his question, that will of course be for the inquiry. I would merely point out that one of the leaked documents was from two years ago and three were from about eight to 10 days ago.
UK Ambassador to USA: Leaked Emails — House of Commons, 2019-07-08
Topic: Other
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the leaks from the UK ambassador’s office in Washington.
Alan James Carter Duncan (Conservative, Centre-right): I have to give the same answer I gave some moments ago, which is that that smacks a bit of a conspiracy theory. The motivation behind the leak is difficult to analyse and assess. What matters is the fact that there was a leak. That is what we have to focus on and address.