argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Human Rights Act — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
David Thomas Charles Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): It has been reported that 28 terrorists have used the Human Rights Act to avoid deportation—no doubt using legal aid as well. Is it not time to scrap the Act and to start thinking less about the human rights of terrorists and foreign-born criminals and more about the human rights of law-abiding members of the British public?
Justice System: Women — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): Both boys and girls have to wear uniforms at school. Both men and women have to wear uniforms in the workplace. However, convicted men have to wear uniforms in prison while convicted women do not. Does the Minister agree with that? If so, what does the word "equality" mean to him?
Justice System: Women — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Phillip James Lee (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend has a rich track record in this area. Women are twice as likely to report experiences of abuse as a child. They are more likely than men to be primary or sole carers of their children. They are more likely to display mental health problems and, indeed, class A drug use. It is important that we have a gender-specific approach for women and if that involves different uniforms, so be it.
Access to Justice — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: As the Minister has mentioned, an important element of improving access to justice is reform of the courts system. Would he like to say a little more about the modernisation of that system and, in particular, whether Lord Justice Briggs’s concept of an online court will be introduced?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, Centre-right): The principle should be that if someone cannot pay and mitigation is required, then there should be a system of mitigation of fees. If someone is able to pay, given that this costs the country a huge amount of money, why should they not make a contribution if they are using these facilities?
Access to Justice — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: As the Minister has mentioned, an important element of improving access to justice is reform of the courts system. Would he like to say a little more about the modernisation of that system and, in particular, whether Lord Justice Briggs’s concept of an online court will be introduced?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, Centre-right): That is a bit rich when, at that debate, I was able to announce that the families had got a legal aid certificate through the Legal Aid Agency. The hon. Gentleman is now talking semantics. I was saying that the element that was needed of equality of arms was being met in accordance with the rules of the agency. When it comes to Labour politicians talking about cuts and concerns about legal aid, it is worth remembering why it was necessary to make those cuts—it was because of the mismanagement of the economy, which the Government inherited in 2010.
Released Offenders: Employment — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Housing
Andrew Edmund Armstrong Selous (Conservative, Centre-right): Will the Minister agree to visit Jobs, Friends & Houses, which not only gets ex-offenders into construction jobs, but helps to find them somewhere to live, gets them off drugs and provides them with a supportive group of friends. That is such a good project; I am hoping to set it up in Bedfordshire as well.
Pardons for Gay and Bisexual Men (Northern Ireland) — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: What discussions she has had with the Northern Ireland Executive on pardons for gay and bisexual men convicted of offences which have subsequently been abolished.
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): If legislation is to be introduced extending the Turing pardon and a disregard process to Northern Ireland, that is a decision for the Northern Ireland Assembly to take. Were the provisions to be extended to Northern Ireland, a legislative consent motion would, by convention, be required.
Leaving the EU: Departmental Responsibilities — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Alan Mak (Conservative, Centre-right): English law—particularly English commercial law—is respected around the world for its quality. Will the Secretary of State confirm that her Department will use Brexit as an opportunity to spread its use around the world, working with our international law firms?
Leaving the EU: Departmental Responsibilities — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Elizabeth Mary Truss (Conservative, Centre-right): I completely agree with my hon. Friend, who has a background in commercial law in one of the top City firms. I had a roundtable with the magic circle and the silver circle to talk about how we can promote those legal areas, as well as all the practices right through the UK, including those practising in Scots law. We have a big opportunity to promote this more widely, and we are using the GREAT campaign as a vehicle to do that.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): A very pithy question. The new threat from drones is a game-changer, not just for prisons but for other parts of the Government. That is why I am working with Ministers across the Government to engage with drone manufacturers to find a solution to this problem. I am keeping a close eye on what is happening internationally, particularly in Holland, where eagles are used to stop drones. I am sure that we will find a solution in the UK that will take off.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: I hope that the Secretary of State is aware that the Scottish Government are going to grant a pardon to men who were convicted of historical consensual same-sex offences involving parties over the age of 16. Will she follow the Scottish Government’s example and commit to a pardon that covers the living as well as the dead?
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): The Government are intent on delivering on their historic manifesto commitment to grant a pardon to all those convicted under archaic gay laws. The Scottish Government have announced their plans, but I note that, even in those plans, they are talking about a disregard process in just the same way as the UK Government. Our disregard process will ensure that people who are guilty of crimes that are still a crime do not accidentally get pardoned. That is absolutely right: to have an appropriate safeguard, we do not right a wrong by creating another injustice.
Orgreave — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. I recognise that this is a subject that arouses very strong feeling, but the House knows me well enough by now to know that I will facilitate the fullest possible questioning on the matter from Members in all parts of the House. However, I ought to be able to say without fear of contradiction that the hon. Member for Shipley will be heard.
Orgreave — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Brandon Kenneth Lewis (Conservative, Centre-right): As I have said, if new information becomes available, the IPCC will look into investigating it. I had that conversation with the chairman of the IPCC yesterday, and I refer the hon. Gentleman to the comments I made on that earlier this afternoon. I would also like to think that the public will look at the track record of the Government, the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister in taking on vested interests and making difficult decisions. This has been a difficult decision. The Home Secretary has made a decision that we believe is in the wider public interest, and it is the right decision.
Orgreave — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. There is so much yelling from each side of the Chamber that it was difficult for me to hear the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant), who should be heard by the House—and, indeed, by the world. I also need to hear the response from the Minister, which should also be widely heard. I say to Members on both sides: please, hold your noise.
Orgreave — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Brandon Kenneth Lewis (Conservative, Centre-right): As I have said, there are considerable differences between the two situations. The basis on which the Government’s decision on an inquiry into Orgreave was made was whether it would be in the wider public interest.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I welcome the hon. Gentleman to the Dispatch Box, but I disagree with much of what he has just said. Let me start by being clear about victims of press intrusion: the first people I met in this job regarding press regulation were the victims of phone hacking—I did so with Hacked Off. I have been determined throughout my time in this role to make sure that I meet as many victims as possible; I did the same in my previous role in the Home Office and I continue to do it, because if we do not listen to people and what they have been through, we cannot possibly imagine it and legislate in an appropriate way. But what is clear to me, and I think to him, is that we all want effective, robust press regulation, so we have to look at the situation we find ourselves in today, not five years ago, to make sure we can achieve that. In his list of things that had happened, he actually set out all the reasons why we need to take a step back and to consider the position, so I invite responses from all interested bodies—from all people affected by this. I am sure that we will get many, many responses to the consultation and I welcome them. We need to look at this in terms of the situation and the press regulation we have today, to make sure we get the right, appropriate, robust, effective press regulation, so that, as he said, we do all we can to protect people.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman raises the issues regarding the devolution of regulation of the press. As he will know, part 2 of Leveson will cover the whole United Kingdom but, as he said, section 40 covers England and Wales. I am due to speak to Fiona Hyslop this afternoon to discuss exactly how we make sure it works across the whole country. He makes the point strongly that many good local newspapers were not involved in any form of press abuse or intrusion, and we need to make sure that we do press regulation in a way that protects a free, vibrant local press.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Peter James Bottomley (Conservative, Centre-right): I declare an interest, in that I have had four successful defamation actions against newspapers. I say to my right hon. Friend that having an effective, robust press is even more important than having effective, robust press regulation. If we have 2,500 newspapers, including all those—or nearly all those—represented by the Society of Editors, and we have a pretty pathetic list in IMPRESS, most of which do not have a circulation of more than 200, 300 or 1,000, we must not introduce section 40 and we ought to find a way in which the IPSO people cannot be forced into the Press Recognition Panel but can be recognised as representing newspapers, with a proper way of redress?
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): What I said is that we are going to consult; it is a 10-week consultation, and it is very clearly about part 2 of the Leveson inquiry and the commencement of section 40. I want to hear all views in that consultation.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I read that same article, and I should read out what Peter Preston says: "It doesn’t make sense any longer. Blanket bitterness stuck in a time warp. Most editors, like most politicians, with a soupçon of perspective, would know what to say about such impasses. Time to dismantle the barricades. Time to move on."
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman and I discussed that at the Select Committee last week. We share a local paper in the Stoke Sentinel, which has communicated with both of us, but he must recognise that the Stoke Sentinel and others have signed up to IPSO, which does not have recognition under the Press Recognition Panel. We need to ensure that we get this right, which is why we need to take stock, listen to all views and consider the position based on the fact that we are now five years on from the original date of the inquiry.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Oliver Letwin (Conservative, Centre-right): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for that equivocal introduction I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. Does she agree that the members of IPSO—the press—could spare us a lot of grief and move the matter on if they were to enforce, through IPSO, a genuinely Leveson-compliant regime, including the provision of a low-cost arbitration service?
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): Will the Secretary of State bear most in mind the weakening and poor health of local and national newspapers, as set out by my right hon. Friend the Member for Maldon (Mr Whittingdale), and make sure that they will always be protected in being able to expose people in authority? They should be protected from rich bullies who, by the very threat of legal action against them, may force newspapers not to print stories that would be in the public interest. Not doing that may suit many people in this House, but it would do a gross disservice to the public at large.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): As I told the hon. Member for West Bromwich East (Mr Watson), I have met victims and I will continue to meet them. I will ensure that I have correspondence and engagement with all, but I wanted to come to the House and make this announcement because Parliament needs to hear it first.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): I suppose I had better begin by declaring an hereditary interest rather than a direct one I want to commend my right hon. Friend for her excellent statement. She is clearly right to be reviewing this, because the system cannot be working when IMPRESS, funded by a degenerate libertine who was embarrassed by free newspapers a few years ago, has only 50 subscribers, and IPSO, representing the vast swathe of the press, has 2,500 subscribers. She is quite right to review that, and also right to defend the freedom of the press, which is more important than the press being responsible.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. That is why we are having a consultation. I want to hear all responses, and I want to look at this in the light of today, not of five, 10 or 15 years ago.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I do not accept that point. We have commenced the exemplary damages point. We now have a recognised regulator. Now is the time to take stock and look at what further work needs to be done.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax (Conservative, Centre-right): As a former journalist of some 17 years, I was shocked when only 14 of us in this House voted against the Royal Charter all those years ago, and I questioned whether democracy was at risk. May I remind Opposition Members and perhaps one or two Government Members that phone hacking is already illegal and a person will go to jail if they commit that offence? Finally, local newspapers, which had nothing to do with the scandal that occurred in a very small majority of the major newspapers, fear that if they have to pay costs despite even winning their case, they will have to close down and they will not be able to challenge those who should be challenged.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
James Gerald Douglas Howarth (Conservative, Centre-right): Like my right hon. Friend, I believe in a free press, but I also believe in a responsible press. Does she not agree that a great virtue of the Leveson inquiry was that it took this whole contentious issue out of the hands of politicians; that by going for this consultation, which she will respond to, she is in danger of embroiling politicians in the issue again; and that low-cost arbitration has to be part of the solution?
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robert Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Centre-right): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will get to it now We in the House unanimously agreed to support Leveson part 1. Well, most of us agreed. Is the consultation, therefore, simply a tactic to get the press on board?
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is usually at the top of my list. I want to assure him that this is an open, frank consultation where we want to hear all views so we can make a decision based on the situation we find ourselves in today to get the effective, robust regulation that we all want.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): I apologise if the hon. Gentleman does not think that I answered the question, but, to be clear, I discussed the matter with the hon. Member for West Bromwich East earlier. The conversation I had with Lord Leveson is private and I am not going to comment on it in public.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Matthew Robert Warman (Conservative, Centre-right): I should declare that I spent 15 years as a journalist at The Daily Telegraph. We all feel profound sympathy for the victims in this situation, but, overall, is not the real prize that a good, free, robust and boisterous press holds the Government to account regionally, locally and nationally? If we get that wrong by allowing it to become either unsustainable or impractically regulated, we will lose far more than we are talking about today.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karen Anne Bradley (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend makes the point very well. We want a robust, free, strong press that holds us to account. We will not like it when the press holds us to account, but it should have the right to do so.
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robert Edward Jenrick (Conservative, Centre-right): My local, family-owned newspaper, the Newark Advertiser, knows what it is like to be vexatiously sued by a politician. When Harold Laski sued the newspaper to try to ruin a local family, the Parlbys, he lost. That is now one of the leading cases in this area of law. Of course, had these rules been in place, the family would still have been ruined and my local newspaper would still have been put out of business. In the consultation, will the Secretary of State pay particular attention to local newspapers and, above all, to independent titles such as the Newark Advertiser?
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Kevin John Foster (Conservative, Centre-right): I am sure the Secretary of State, like me, will be amazed by the spectacle of a Parliament in which it is the Opposition who are demanding more restrictions on the press. Will she reassure me that we will balance any future system against the needs of the local media, particularly in an era when, sometimes, update lists via email run by Members of the House have a larger circulation?
Press Matters — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Crispin Jeremy Rupert Blunt (Conservative, Centre-right): Believing that my right hon. Friend’s heart is in the right place, I wonder whether the irony in her repeated statement that this is the right thing to do for today was intended or unintended. What assurance can she give me that she will commence section 40 if there is no other way to get to low-cost arbitration?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I do not think it would be right for me to engage in public exhortation, and certainly it is for Ministers to decide when to make an oral statement and when to make a written statement. That said, the hon. Lady has made an interesting observation about what appears to represent a change of heart, and indeed of intended policy. In such circumstances, it is commonplace, and invariably appreciated by the House, if a Minister chooses to come to it formally to announce that and to be open to questioning on the matter The hon. Lady has made her point with her usual force and eloquence and it will have been heard by those on the Treasury Bench. At this stage, I say let us await the development of events There are no further points of order now, although I have a feeling that one is brewing and we will hear it erelong, at a time the hon. Member in question thinks apposite in relation to upcoming business. Before we get to that, we have a ten-minute rule Bill.
Investigatory Powers Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Lords amendment 12, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 13, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 14, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 15, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 338, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 339, and Government motion to disagree.
Investigatory Powers Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Robert Ben Lobban Wallace (Conservative, Centre-right): I know that the hon. Gentleman is an impatient individual, but 10 weeks is not a long time to wait in engaging in a consultation. [Interruption.] He says, "Three and a half years", but what is 10 weeks on top of that?
Investigatory Powers Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robert Ben Lobban Wallace (Conservative, Centre-right): I think we can debate Zippy another time This is about an important issue of principle. Throughout all the Bills I have ever been involved in, we in this House have gone out of our way to make sure that we seek the up-front approval of the Scottish Parliament in an LCM before we start down the path of picking and choosing what we do or do not support.
Investigatory Powers Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): What the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry) said may well be true, but this is our last opportunity to approve or reject the amendment. If it goes back to the House of Lords, and all the other amendments that we make are agreed to, there will be no further opportunity to amend the Bill, so legislating now, without consent, would make the law.
Investigatory Powers Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-01
Topic: Other
Robert Ben Lobban Wallace (Conservative, Centre-right): Not for the first time, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. This is the last opportunity to amend this Bill—there will be no going back. Should the hon. and learned Lady wish to go back, then we shall hear her options.