argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Universal Credit Work Allowance — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Macroeconomics
Gerald Jones (Labour, Centre-left): That is one example of the wrong choices being made by the Government but there are others. They have given further support to big businesses by cutting corporation tax. They have chosen to continue the cut in the top rate of income tax from 50% to 45%, allowing someone earning £2 million a year to continue to pay £250,000 a year less in income tax. Those are clearly wrong choices, and they are made on the backs of ordinary working families. Against that background, the decision to penalise working families who are already struggling to make ends meet is wrong in so many ways The changes will cause worry and undue stress to millions of families. I therefore urge Conservative Members to support the Labour motion today, and not to turn their backs on working families.
Universal Credit Work Allowance — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Social Welfare
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): The Government are not going ahead with the tax credit cuts, so why is it right to go ahead with precisely the same cuts for the minority of people who have the misfortune to be claiming not tax credits but universal credit?
Flooding — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Environment
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): As I will go on to mention, the Pitt review, which was initiated in 2007 by the last Labour Government, recommended year-on-year above inflation increases in spending. That is exactly what the Labour Government did. It was only when the coalition Government got in in 2010 that that spending was reversed I was talking about the warnings that the Government have ignored, such as the warning from the Committee on Climate Change.
Flooding — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Environment
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): I will come on to Dieter Helm’s recommendations, which I agree make a really important contribution, and to the general issue of upstream management. The hon. Gentleman’s constituents would perhaps be concerned by the thought that they would be paying more in their water bills in order to address this situation The motion asks the Government whether they would be prepared to meet the £800 million a year of spending that the Environment Agency recommended. I look forward to hearing the Secretary of State’s response. On the point about water bills, people already struggle to pay very high insurance premiums. In many cases, they have to make up for losses not covered by insurance. They have to meet excesses of up to £10,000 themselves. They would really struggle if they were hit by rising water bills on top of that Many people are angered by the Prime Minister’s claims today. A six-year programme of investment is welcome, but we need to know it will address the lasting legacy of the coalition’s cuts and that the money will be available given the reliance on external contributions. With the slow progress that has been made on infrastructure projects, we need to know when the schemes will be built. Communities cannot wait another six years for work even to start. We know how slow the progress has been on some on the schemes supposedly already in the pipeline We need the Environment Secretary to realise that any benefit from new schemes will be diminished if the Government allow existing schemes to deteriorate. In 2013-14, it was estimated that almost three quarters of flood defence asset systems would not be sufficiently maintained. Maintenance spending fell by 6% in real terms under the coalition.
Flooding — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Environment
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): As well as the point my hon. Friend is making, we need an Environment Secretary who understands, particularly in urban areas, the value of floodplains, such as those around Denton and Reddish Vale. They were completely submerged over the Christmas period, doing precisely what they are supposed to do: take the excess water away from further up the Tame valley, where flooding could have been much worse. Those areas are set to be reviewed as part of the Greater Manchester green-belt review. They are at risk of being taken out of the green belt for development.
Flooding — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Environment
John Woodcock (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Does she advocate pressing the Government for a complete review of the guidance to local authorities, because at the moment they can say, "Oh well, the Environment Agency hasn’t designated it a floodplain"? Clearly, their thinking is out of date, given the changes in climate conditions in recent years.
Flooding — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Environment
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Secretary of State not accept what is happening with climate change? Once-in-200-year events have now become once-in-100-years events, and it was accepted at the Paris conference that another 2 degrees would probably be added to world temperatures. There is surely no excuse for not investing more and more—even more than we planned to invest following the 2007 Pitt review. Will the Secretary of State urge the Government to invest even more than is proposed under the current agreement?
Vauxhall Bus Station — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Transportation
Catharine Letitia Hoey (Labour, Centre-left): I am pleased to have this opportunity to bring to the attention of the House and the Minister the anger that is felt by my constituents, and by many other people in a much wider area, about the plans of Transport for London and Lambeth Council to demolish Vauxhall bus station. It is also an opportunity for me to express publicly our concern about the series of misleading statements about the matter that are currently on the TfL website, and, indeed, to raise widely the view of, I believe, thousands of people that TfL consultations are clever exercises which do not give the public an opportunity to answer the real question, but are designed to give the answer that is wanted by TfL In London, 2014 was celebrated as a year of the bus, but now, in 2016, there seems to have been a cultural change in both City Hall and TfL from championing bus passengers to scrapping bus lanes. We are seeing more and more buses being forced into general traffic lanes, slower journey times, frequencies being cut, and, now, the incredible decision to demolish Vauxhall bus station Just 15 years ago, Arup Associates won a public competition to build a new bus station within the gyratory. The commissioning statement from TfL said that the purpose was "to create a coherent and efficient interchange for bus, rail and Underground users…to promote the use of public transport" and to be "a landmark structure to enhance the local environment and amenity." Less than 12 years ago, the bus station was completed at a cost of £4.5 million, and was opened by Ken Livingstone. It was immediately hailed by architects and public transport users as inspired. Jonathan Glancey, The Guardian’s architectural correspondent, said that it was "a trumpet blast", but that what made it "so special is the fact that it is localised… the Vauxhall bus station does show what can be done as public transport in London is taken increasingly seriously… it points to a new ambition, however crudely expressed by politicians, to make London’s public transport system among the finest in the world." That was 12 years ago By the way, the ski-slope roof is not just a gesture. It is studded with photovoltaic cells which, angled towards the sun, help to generate electricity for the station’s lighting At the time, those who had used the previous dreadful facilities expressed their delight. Peter Hendy, then in charge of TfL, said then that "The Vauxhall Cross interchange has been an ambitious project for TfL. For passengers at Vauxhall Cross, changing between bus, rail and Tube had been difficult for a long time." The view was that following the changes the interchange would "provide easier access to, and transfer between, bus, Tube and rail services" I want to mention some key facts. Vauxhall is the second busiest interchange in London, after Victoria.
Vauxhall Bus Station — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Transportation
Fiona Margaret Mactaggart (Labour, Centre-left): I have a home just the other side of Vauxhall bus station from Westminster. Twelve years ago, when it was being built, there was a big hole in the road, and people who lived at the other end of Wandsworth road were unable to escape south London. If TfL is to knock the bus station down, I fear that again people across south-west and southern London will be cut off from the centre of London for months.
Vauxhall Bus Station — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Government Operations
Catharine Letitia Hoey (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am very pleased to say that and I will do so because people felt that very strongly TfL said that it was trying to get the consultation on the plans "out of the way" by March—that means before the mayoral elections, as public bodies will enter a period of purdah in March. It has refused to extend the deadline and there has been no wider consultation in the area of Waterloo, Westminster or Southwark. Today the first meeting was held in Wandsworth in the Clapham library near Clapham Junction, and I understand that one person turned up in the first half hour.
Vauxhall Bus Station — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Transportation
Paul Phillip Flynn (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend acknowledge that the current bus station is a splendid example of what is rarely achieved in urban planning—an integrated transport system where the buses are above the trains? It is also a fine iconic building.
Vauxhall Bus Station — House of Commons, 2016-01-06
Topic: Transportation
Catharine Letitia Hoey (Labour, Centre-left): I know the Minister has the TfL briefing, but if he knew as much about TfL as we do, he would not believe it. The briefing is wrong. The proposed canopy will not go over everywhere—it will be like little bus stop covers that he can find at any bus stop. The proposal is not for a bus station or interchange, but for a hotch-potch of bus stops put together.
Devolved Business Rates — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Clive James Charles Betts (Labour, Centre-left): I would like to take the Secretary of State up on that so that he can explain precisely how it will happen. The Institute for Fiscal Studies said the other day that it is perfectly possible to compensate for the changes in small business rate relief at present, while there is grant in play, but that it will be nigh impossible to do that from 2020 onwards, when there will be no grant for the Government to use. Also, how, precisely, will the Secretary of State compensate for the change from RPI to CPI, given that that involves a variable that changes every year? How will the mechanism work?
Devolved Business Rates — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Education
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): Did the Secretary of State see comments in the Sunday papers saying that poorer areas of the country will again be doubly disadvantaged? What is the point of mucking around with local government finance if we continue to rob local government of its powers? Taking away responsibility for education must be one of the most shocking and negative things that I have heard in any Budget.
Devolved Business Rates — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Government Operations
Steven Mark Ward Reed (Labour, Centre-left): With a former Cabinet Minister openly admitting that the Government are dividing Britain with unfair cuts, will the Secretary of State reconsider his divisive decision to cut the 10 poorest councils 23 times harder than the 10 richest?
Local Government Funding — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Government Operations
Clive Anthony Lewis (Labour, Centre-left): Last month, the Government announced that 85% of the £300 million transitional fund for local government is going not to Labour or Liberal Democrat councils, but to Conservative councils. Does the Secretary of State agree with the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith) that that does not matter, because those areas "don’t vote for us"?
Local Government Funding — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Government Operations
Andrew Joseph McDonald (Labour, Centre-left): As a native Teessider, it cannot have escaped the Secretary of State’s attention that towns such as Middlesbrough have been hit hardest by his local government cuts, yet Middlesbrough has not had a penny from the transitional fund. It seems that this Government’s duty is only to those wealthier areas that voted Tory. Is he not ashamed of his callous and unfair treatment of his hometown?
Local Government Funding — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Social Welfare
Elizabeth Anne McInnes (Labour, Centre-left): Following this weekend’s revelation that the Government have targeted the working poor because they do not vote Tory, will the Secretary of State admit that the same warped thinking led him to hand £465,000 of transitional funding to Tory-run Trafford council and nothing to Labour-controlled Manchester and Rochdale?
Social Care — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Social Welfare
William Roffen Esterson (Labour, Centre-left): Yet the Budget reveals a black hole of £4.3 billion for social care alone. Why are the Government prioritising giving tax cuts to the wealthiest while refusing to make sure there is decent social care for our elderly and disabled people?
Social Care — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Social Welfare
Emma Louise Lewell-Buck (Labour, Centre-left): Age UK reports that 300,000 elderly people are suffering from chronic loneliness, which leads to early death. The cuts imposed by, and inaction from, the Department for Communities and Local Government are letting our elderly people die. Is the Minister proud of that?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Labor
Daniel Stephen Zeichner (Labour, Centre-left): The local government pension scheme provides future security in retirement for millions of public service workers. It is a funded scheme financed by the contributions of those workers. The Government now seem to be trying to interfere in the way those funds are invested, but investment decisions should be driven by the interests of the members of the scheme. What legal powers do the Government have to do this? Are they intending to direct the investment strategies of other UK pension funds? If not, why treat the local government pension scheme differently?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: Many towns and villages in my constituency have formally adopted their neighbourhood plans. Places such as Newick and Ringmer have had their plans in place for a long time, yet they are constantly challenged by developers who put in applications for sites outside the plan. Will the Minister uphold the status of neighbourhood plans in the planning process and return local democracy to our villages and towns?; Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating Wychavon district council on utilising the new homes bonus and investing more than £1 million in local community facilities? Will he take time out of his very busy schedule to visit that outstanding council with me to see some of those schemes?; I accept that the final quantum award under any EU solidarity fund has not been decided, but may I nevertheless ask the Minister to ensure that, however it is apportioned, it reaches the communities that were actually affected? A simple population share going to the Scottish Government will not ensure that it reaches my constituency of Dumfries and Galloway.; Can the Minister update the House on the future of the coastal communities fund and reassure me that future rounds will focus on tackling the social problems that blight so many of our coastal communities?; Rather than cutting support to people with disabilities, would it not be better for the Government to cut the housing benefit bill, which is up by £4.4 billion over the past four years? Is not that due to the Government’s failure to build enough houses, which is driving up rents and heavy reliance on the private rented sector? Is it not a disgrace that the Budget did not put any money into building social housing?; Last week’s Budget saw welcome news for small businesses and pubs across my constituency in the form of the changes to business rates. What support will my hon. Friend give to Torbay Council to ensure that local businesses in my constituency benefit as soon as possible?; The financial cost of homelessness is going up to nearly £1 billion. Research from the charity Crisis has shown that tackling single homelessness early could save the Government between £3,000 and £18,000 for each person they help. What work are the Government doing with charities such as Crisis?; Construction of the Middlewich eastern bypass would open up substantial local and wider growth opportunities. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how this long-awaited project can be progressed?
Peter John Kyle (Labour, Centre-left): During his statement on local government funding, the Secretary of State said that he would re-examine the fact that the social care precept will help the areas that need it most the least. How has he updated his thinking, because the areas of the country that rely on this the most are simply not getting the investment they need?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: Many towns and villages in my constituency have formally adopted their neighbourhood plans. Places such as Newick and Ringmer have had their plans in place for a long time, yet they are constantly challenged by developers who put in applications for sites outside the plan. Will the Minister uphold the status of neighbourhood plans in the planning process and return local democracy to our villages and towns?; Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating Wychavon district council on utilising the new homes bonus and investing more than £1 million in local community facilities? Will he take time out of his very busy schedule to visit that outstanding council with me to see some of those schemes?; I accept that the final quantum award under any EU solidarity fund has not been decided, but may I nevertheless ask the Minister to ensure that, however it is apportioned, it reaches the communities that were actually affected? A simple population share going to the Scottish Government will not ensure that it reaches my constituency of Dumfries and Galloway.; Can the Minister update the House on the future of the coastal communities fund and reassure me that future rounds will focus on tackling the social problems that blight so many of our coastal communities?; Rather than cutting support to people with disabilities, would it not be better for the Government to cut the housing benefit bill, which is up by £4.4 billion over the past four years? Is not that due to the Government’s failure to build enough houses, which is driving up rents and heavy reliance on the private rented sector? Is it not a disgrace that the Budget did not put any money into building social housing?; Last week’s Budget saw welcome news for small businesses and pubs across my constituency in the form of the changes to business rates. What support will my hon. Friend give to Torbay Council to ensure that local businesses in my constituency benefit as soon as possible?; The financial cost of homelessness is going up to nearly £1 billion. Research from the charity Crisis has shown that tackling single homelessness early could save the Government between £3,000 and £18,000 for each person they help. What work are the Government doing with charities such as Crisis?; Construction of the Middlewich eastern bypass would open up substantial local and wider growth opportunities. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how this long-awaited project can be progressed?
John Robert Cryer (Labour, Centre-left): In only six years the Government have managed to take away £100 million from Waltham Forest Council, which, funnily enough, happens to be Labour. How does the Secretary of State think that has assisted local services?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): Five days ago, the Chancellor stood at that Dispatch Box and published the Budget scorecard with a £4.4 billion cut to PIP. Where is the revised scorecard without it? Is it true that this cut will instead come from elsewhere in the DWP budget? If the Chancellor is too scared to answer questions in this House on the issue, he is not fit to do the job.
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has to accept that there will be a serious problem with the votes on the Budget resolutions tomorrow. How on earth is the House supposed to make a judgment when page 103 of the Red Book has been totally ripped up and changed? We are none the wiser about the contents of that section. Will he just answer one question? On a scale of one to 10, how embarrassed is he today?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Rachel Jane Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): Last week’s Budget makes the 2012 omnishambles Budget look like a model of good policy making. Can the Financial Secretary confirm that the Red Book is still the basis for the Budget and, if it is, that the £4.4 billion cut to disability benefits still stands?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Social Welfare
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor made no effort to justify the cut in disability benefits in the Budget statement, beyond saying that it would save a lot of money. Yesterday, we heard from the former DWP Secretary that the Chancellor’s view is that people claiming disability benefits will never vote Conservative so there is no reason for restraint in cutting their benefits. Will the Financial Secretary respond to that allegation?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Chuka Harrison Umunna (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has talked about debt and our record. Of course, the last Government borrowed more in five years than the Labour Government did in 13 years. We understand that Conservative Members are clamouring for a change to the PIP proposals, on the basis that they disproportionately hit the disabled. If that is the case, why not also reverse another measure that disproportionately hits the disabled—namely, the disgraceful and appalling bedroom tax?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Shabana Mahmood (Labour, Centre-left): Given that the Chancellor has been warning us all about the so-called global cocktail of risks, and given that we learned from the Budget statement that our growth forecasts are down, as are those for our productivity, which is fast reaching crisis point, what possible justification can the Minister offer, considering all the other changes that have already been made to the Budget, for retaining the substantial cut to capital gains tax, which disproportionately benefits the better off and is simply a cut that, at this point, we do not need?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Macroeconomics
Nicholas Dakin (Labour, Centre-left): Some £4.4 billion seems to have fallen out of the Budget. Will the Minister confirm that that is the case? When is the Chancellor going to come here and tell us where he is finding the money?
Budget Changes — House of Commons, 2016-03-21
Topic: Social Welfare
Mary Helen Creagh (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister agree with the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith) that the cuts to personal independence payments for disabled people were "not defensible in the way they were placed within a Budget that benefits higher earning taxpayers"?