argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
Mark Gino Francois (Conservative, Centre-right): At the risk of being called a Government nark—which I am not often called at the moment—I want to ask the hon. Gentleman this question. If this emergency debate is so important to Scottish National party Members, where are they?
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
Mark Gino Francois (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman for his courtesy. Through him, I wanted to respond to the Labour gentleman sitting at the back there—[Hon. Members: "He’s SNP as well."] Oh, I am so sorry. That means there are about 13 of them. I do apologise. Most members of the ERG are, as I speak, working towards how our country can be free, so they are otherwise engaged—
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. There has been a certain amount of frivolity on the matter of attendance at the debate, but perhaps we can now return to the theme of the debate rather than having a constant competition as to who can be more amusing at others’ expense on the matter of attendance.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. The hon. Gentleman must confine himself to the subject matter of today’s debate, the terms of which have been specified and which the Secretary of State will answer. This cannot be a general ad hominem attack on the Secretary of State or a replay of other matters that happened at an earlier point in the Secretary of State’s career to which Members want to object.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): We knew, in accelerating the procurement process, that there was a legal risk. That has been highlighted in the NAO report. However, it was my judgment, the judgment of my accounting officer and the judgment of those who vetted the plan across the Government that that was a risk that we should take, given the need to ensure that we had a supply of drugs into the country in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): I can absolutely confirm that, and I think it is absolutely right and proper that we took the steps necessary to ensure that continuity of supply. We did so with a collective decision across the Government, taken by Cabinet Committees.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. Look, I understand passions are high, but the hon. and learned Lady must not say that the Secretary of State is not telling the truth, because that—[Interruption.] Order. That is an imputation of dishonesty. The hon. and learned Lady may think that the Secretary of State is wrong, but I am afraid before the debate proceeds further she must withdraw that charge.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I say to the hon. and learned Lady that I am chairing this debate. The hon. and learned Lady will speak in full, or otherwise, if and when she catches the eye of the Chair. Thank you.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): Mr Speaker, I simply reiterate: the settlement that we have reached with Eurotunnel is going to pay for improved facilities at the border, to improve flow, to make sure that our border through the tunnel works more smoothly in future, particularly in the post-Brexit world. That is a simple, factual point about the settlement that has been reached.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): I have to say that the management of the port of Dover have been exemplary for the last few weeks in co-operating with us, not only over this but in preparations for no deal. They rightly judged that it was not in their corporate reputational benefit to try to block the delivery of drugs to the NHS in a post-Brexit world. I am disappointed that not everyone took the same view.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Brett Charles Anthony Elphicke (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate the hon. Member for Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Alan Brown) on securing this debate. He has been far more efficient and effective than the official Opposition, who did not seek this opportunity It seems to me, representing one of the channel ports as I do, that the issue is that the people of Britain voted to leave the European Union. Some 17.4 million people voted to leave and we need to make a success of it. They voted to leave because they believed in Britain and in the kind of land of opportunity that we could build. They believed in the kind of future that we could make outside the European Union. That vote needs to be respected Having backed remain myself, after the vote I listened to my constituents, who said, "Let’s leave," and I spent time on contingency planning. Two years ago, I set out a detailed report about how we needed to be ready on day one, deal or no deal; how we could overhaul our entire customs systems, our road infrastructure and our border infrastructure; and how that investment would be no-regret spending because a more efficient border system would provide economic growth. That is not just my case; it is what Jon Thompson, head of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, said in evidence to the Treasury Committee when I raised the possibility of a single Department for borders. That is why I say that it is no-regret spending to invest in our borders, our border security and our border systems The shadow Secretary of State rejects as absurd the view that we should make such an investment. No doubt it would not be made by a Labour Government—they did not make it last time, so they would not do it now. They are not serious about border security, and they have a leader who believes that every single migrant should be allowed to wander into the country.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Brett Charles Anthony Elphicke (Conservative, Centre-right): I have given way quite a lot, so I will make some progress The Secretary of State has worked hard in the national interest to make sure that contingency plans, once authorised, have been taken forward. I pressed him on the point, because I wanted to see a new route from Dover to Zeebrugge in Belgium, but it would have required a level of intervention that is difficult under the procurement rules. As it was, he undertook procedures that were known within the Department to be legally risky, but were seen as being in the national interest because of the time available. I have to agree that that decision was in the national interest. It would have been very easy for the port of Dover to go for an opportunistic legal action on the basis that it was being shut out of the process, but it would not have been the right thing to do Everyone across the country could see what the Secretary of State was trying to achieve: to take pressure off the port of Dover and the channel tunnel in case there were difficulties with France. That was a concern at the time because of the kind of rhetoric that was coming from the French President, Monsieur Macron. Now that things have moved on and we know that the European Union will extend transit on a no-deal basis, the risk of such difficulties is much less, but that was not known at the time. It is right that the Secretary of State and the Department take measures based on the information before them.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Brett Charles Anthony Elphicke (Conservative, Centre-right): The difficulty with the hon. Lady’s point is that she and her party are trying to lay the blame opportunistically at the Secretary of State’s door. My point is that the Government as a whole should have released the funds and made the decision to invest in our borders. Irrespective of this debate and of Brexit, that investment is in the national interest because our country will benefit from having more efficient, effective, safe and secure borders and from more efficient trading systems. Fewer people will be able to enter the country unlawfully, and people who are here unlawfully can be helped back to where they have come from We need to ensure that our trading systems are efficient and effective not just for our trade with Europe, but for the trade that we already do under World Trade Organisation terms. The more efficient we make them, the more economic growth we will get. Again, those are not my words, but those of Jon Thompson in evidence to the Treasury Committee—and he runs HMRC.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Sit down. The hon. Gentleman did not put in to speak. He is signalling that he wishes to speak, and that—[Interruption.] If he leaves me to make the judgment and tell him what the situation is, he will benefit from the instruction that I am about to give him. Working on the basis of an informal time limit, it would be helpful if colleagues did not exceed 12 minutes each. I call Mr Kevin Foster.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kevin John Foster (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. When we are investing in border security, we do not usually put the exact details of what we are doing out there, do we? However, that issue has certainly been covered.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
Peter James Bottomley (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Is it customary for the Member who is speaking to provoke a Minister into looking at her directly and then to say that he is somehow interrupting her. It seems to me it would be far better if the hon. and learned Lady went on addressing the Chair and left the Minister to listen, like the rest of us.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman has his own interpretation of the chronology of events, which those attending to observe our proceedings can make a judgment about for themselves, and that is one point of view. If I may say so, there is another point of view, which is that the hon. and learned Lady was somewhat disquieted, not to say mildly irritated, by the junior Minister’s evident fascination with the contents of his electronic device. It might be thought courteous not to be focusing intently on the said contents when a Member is addressing the House. I hope the hon. Gentleman will not take offence when I say that he is in the end a very loyal sort of person, and it is not terribly surprising that he should spring to the defence of his ministerial colleague and fellow parliamentarian. It was very gracious of him and a nice try.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Brett Charles Anthony Elphicke (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. and learned Lady for giving way, and I have been listening carefully to her submissions. The question of purpose is dealt with in the National Audit Office report, which states that the decision was meant "to prioritise the flow of critical goods into the UK" Specifically, the report says that in September and October 2018, the intention was to "‘ensure that capacity and flexibility exists for government to prioritise the flow’ of certain…goods" In November 2018, the Department’s business case was "to ensure that capacity and flexibility exist for government to enable the prioritisation of…certain goods" It seems to me that critical goods were always in the mind of the Department, so I am not sure that her submissions to the House are borne out.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. There are two remaining speakers. Just as a helpful guide to both hon. Members, the average length of Back-Bench speeches has been approximately 10 minutes. Neither hon. Member need feel a driving ambition to exceed that very satisfactory self-imposed time constraint.
EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): That is an extremely helpful point of order from the right hon. Gentleman, and I thank him. It is by way of being a public information notice and I take it very much in that spirit.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): The additional funding for health and education is partly down to the new money that the Treasury has found—the £140 million—but it is also down to Barnett consequentials and other reasons. We have worked to ensure that the money that is needed by Departments, as requested by the permanent secretaries, is given to them, but the shadow Secretary of State is right that it is for business as usual activities. Major policy decisions cannot be taken at this stage because that needs political leadership.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): The written ministerial statement sets out the departmental allocations. Those are the moneys that the permanent secretaries have asked me to deliver to them. I cannot direct the spending within those Departments. I also cannot ask them exactly which work streams or programmes they will spend the money on, because in this House we do not have the Executive power to do that. However, I am making it possible for the spending that has already happened to have the statutory footing that it needs, and I am making possible the vote on account for next year, as agreed with the permanent secretaries of each Department It is not a satisfactory process. I do not deny that this is not the ideal way to do it. The ideal way to do this would be to have Ministers in Stormont who are able to direct departmental spending and to have a budget process that is done in the same way as the overall budget is done for the United Kingdom in the Treasury; but we are not in a situation where that can happen, so unfortunately, this is where we are.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I understand the point the hon. Gentleman makes. He has significant experience in Northern Ireland and will know a great deal about it. The police put in a specific bid for additional resources for Brexit preparations. It went through the proper processes in the Treasury and this has been paid. I recognise his frustration about wanting more information here for parliamentarians, and I have supplied the information I am able to supply in my capacity as Secretary of State. Clearly, we are not looking at the future spending and, when we do the budget for 2019-20—I hope we will not have to, as I hope it will be done by Ministers in Stormont—I will bear in mind the points he has raised.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): As I have said, there is no good alternative for the people of Northern Ireland other than the politicians that they have elected making the decisions on their behalf in Northern Ireland, fully scrutinised and fully accountable to the people who elected them. There is no alternative, and that is why we want to see politicians back in Northern Ireland. [Interruption.] I can hear my right hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (Sir Mike Penning) making noises from a sedentary position.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Michael Penning (Conservative, Centre-right): I have listened carefully to what the shadow Secretary of State has said, and he has made some very reasonable points. I would like to ask him two questions. First, it seems that there is little movement, and we can blame a lot of different people, but at the end of the day it takes two to tango and Sinn Féin needs to come forward and be part of the process. If there is no movement, does he think that direct rule is the answer, two years on? Secondly, he talked about victims. Has he forgotten the victims who were our soldiers, our people and our policemen on the streets of Northern Ireland, who are now being dragged before the courts? Does he not think that they need a mention?
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Civil Rights
Andrew William Murrison (Conservative, Centre-right): As always, I am following all the hon. Gentleman has to say with a great deal of interest. He has mentioned victims, and he is right to do so. Will he say whether he would include within his definition of a victim those who are victims by virtue of actions by their own hand?
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
Michael Penning (Conservative, Centre-right): Can I, in all fairness, challenge the Minister on the way he congratulated the hon. Member for Rochdale (Tony Lloyd) in relation to direct rule? If direct rule is not the answer today, when will it be and, if it is not the answer soon, why?
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
John David Penrose (Conservative, Centre-right): I shall respond swiftly, as I do not want to hold up the rest of the process. The hon. Lady is right to say that she asked that specific question. Let me make two comments in response. First, the judicial changes are not a Westminster Government decision. They are taken, rightly, by independent judiciary in Northern Ireland. Secondly, her question on the medical school needs to be addressed as part of the city deal discussions that are currently getting under way, and I would be happy to discuss that with local people and, if necessary, with her as well. With that, I propose to do something unusual for a politician: stop talking and sit down Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time; to stand committed to a Committee of the whole House (Order, this day).
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Other
Michael Penning (Conservative, Centre-right): Will the right hon. Gentleman give me two seconds? I am in a flow I have raised the issue with shadow Front Benchers and my own—I was a Northern Ireland Minister for a considerable period—because we have to address it. Perhaps I will come back to that point after the right hon. Gentleman’s intervention.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Civil Rights
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I will of course be very happy to provide the hon. Gentleman with more information on that point. Everybody believed that the Human Rights Commission had legal standing. The HRC took the case believing it had legal standing, but it was only during the Supreme Court judgment that that point was clarified. I am very happy to share the information on that point with him Returning to the point raised by the hon. Member for Walthamstow about the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation and Exercise of Functions) Act 2018 and the amendment to section 4 that she pressed to a vote and that this House accepted late last year, clearly the Act cannot change the law in Northern Ireland. The guidance I have issued on what I expect the Northern Ireland Office to do is very clear, but it cannot in itself change the law. I do not have the power to do that through that Act of Parliament. However, I do keep under review the obligations we have on the matter I want to be very clear and to state very clearly that the UK Government remain committed to their obligations under international law, including the European convention on human rights. It is important to recognise that it is for the devolved Administrations across the whole UK to ensure that their domestic laws and actions are compliant. The observance and implementation of international obligations, and obligations under the European convention on human rights, so far as they are otherwise within the competence of the Assembly, are matters for the Northern Ireland Assembly If I can make one final important point, I support the principle of the amendment on same-sex marriage, which was not selected today, and I have been clear on the record that I want changes to the legislation relating to abortion in Northern Ireland. However, those are matters for a restored Executive. We want a restored Executive to progress legislation on that issue as one of the first things they do.
Northern Ireland Budget (Anticipation and Adjustments) (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-03-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): What we are doing today is effectively the estimates process. The moneys we are voting on today have all been voted for and properly scrutinised in this House. We are confirming the departmental spending in 2018-19, so for this current financial year. That spending was done on a proper statutory basis, with the moneys having been properly voted through this place and properly scrutinised in this place in terms of the block grant given to the Northern Ireland Office. What would happen normally is that the Northern Ireland Assembly would hold an estimates day, which would probably be about the same length of time. At the end of it, it would vote on the estimates. We are therefore effectively doing the same thing, but we have to do it through primary legislation because we are unable to do it in any other way in the absence of the Assembly sitting I know that that is not satisfactory and I know it does not feel right to those of us who are used to the full scrutiny of Bills, but I gently say that we are probably giving the Bill about the same amount of time it would have had in the Assembly if it was sitting. This is a very technical Bill. It is about making sure we agree that the spending that has already happened has been done on the proper legislative statutory footing and that we agree that more spending can take place next year without going into any further details about the allocations, merely that we accept that 70% of prior year spending can be spent by the Department without the need for further legislation. I hope that clarifies the point further.