argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Government Operations
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): With the leave of the House, we shall take motions 5 to 12 together Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)), Local Government That the draft West Midlands Combined Authority (Functions and Amendment) Order 2017, which was laid before this House on 6 March, be approved Betting, Gaming and Lotteries That the draft Horserace Betting Levy Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 7 March, be approved Insolvency That the draft Deregulation Act 2015 and Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 (Consequential Amendments) (Savings) Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 2 March, be approved. Employment and Training That the draft Public Sector Apprenticeship Targets Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 6 March, be approved National Health Service That the draft Local Authorities (Public Health Functions and Entry to Premises by Local Healthwatch Representatives) (Amendment) Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 1 March, be approved Public Service Pensions That the draft Judicial Pensions (Fee-Paid Judges) Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 27 February, be approved That the draft Judicial Pensions (Amendment) Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 27 February, be approved That the draft Judicial Pensions (Additional Voluntary Contributions) Regulations 2017, which were laid before this House on 27 February, be approved.—(Heather Wheeler.) Question agreed to.
Proposed closure of Annesley DWP office — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Labor
Gloria De Piero (Labour, Centre-left): I rise to present a petition opposing the closure of the Department for Work and Pensions office in Annesley, which could result in more than 100 job losses, affecting mainly women workers The petition states: The Petition of staff of Annesley DWP office, and their families, Declares that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) are proposing to close Annesley DWP office within the next year (2017/18); further that the DWP are proposing to do this without consideration of the potential loss of 100 plus jobs by compulsory redundancies; further that there has been no consideration of the disproportionate impact on those who work at Annesley by not conducting an Equality Impact Assessment; and further that there has been no consideration of the economic hit on the area because the closure could mean a loss of £1million and this loss will inevitably impact on a number of businesses in the area The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to ensure that Annesley DWP office is kept open, so that there are no job losses And the petitioners remain, etc [P002030]
Mining: Health and Safety — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Labor
Dennis Edward Skinner (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has failed to answer the point about the money that the Government take from the mineworkers pension scheme. Now there are no deep-mine pits left in Britain at all—just a few private mines and bit of open-casting—can we have an assurance that the Government will cease taking that money out of the pension scheme so the miners she is talking about get an even better pension?
School Funding — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Stephen Twigg (Labour, Centre-left): In Liverpool and other cities, there is a real concern that the new formula could mean that schools lose out. Can the Secretary of State reassure the House that issues such as deprivation, prior attainment and mobility will be significant factors in any new formula?
School Funding — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Questions: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In Oxford West and Abingdon, many schools are struggling to meet the needs of pupil premium students in particular. The funding formula has historically been especially low in my constituency. What will the Secretary of State do to address this issue?
Michael Joseph Patrick Kane (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State should be coming to the Dispatch Box first and foremost today to apologise for the collapse of the multi-academy trust in the city of Wakefield. Part of the problem is that schools are waking up to the fact that they have lost £2.8 billion since 2015. Despite another funding consultation, will she confirm or deny the figures from the National Audit Office and, while she is on her feet, apologise to the people of Wakefield?
University Technical Colleges — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister join me in congratulating Alan Johnson, the former MP for Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle, who fought for many years to get the Ron Dearing UTC opened in Hull? It has actually opened its doors this morning for the very first time, and one of its priorities is to encourage more young women to study engineering and technical subjects.
Free Childcare — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Social Welfare
Heidi Alexander (Labour, Centre-left): Last week, 29% of families with eligibility codes for this term had not yet secured a funded childcare place. Will the Minister update the House on what progress has been made, and will he say whether there are specific parts of the country where securing a place is proving particularly problematic?
Free Childcare — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: Back in 2015, David Cameron promised that the 30 hours would, in his words, be “completely free”. Every nursery I speak to in Cambridge tells me that it is having to cross-subsidise and often charge for extras, including lunch. Will the Minister tell us in what sense that is completely free?
Tracy Lynn Brabin (Labour, Centre-left): In their manifesto, the Government said that they would deliver high-quality childcare for working families, supported by thousands of new nursery places every year. However, as they roll out their policy of 30 hours of free childcare, Ministers have admitted that 110,000 children of working parents will not be eligible for the extended childcare entitlement simply because their parents do not earn enough, shutting out families who most need the additional support. That strikes me not as high-quality childcare but as another broken manifesto commitment, akin to the Government’s betrayal on working tax credits in 2015. Does the Minister have any plans to deliver for the lowest-earning and hardest-pressed parents?
Overseas Students — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Questions: What discussions she has had with the Home Secretary on the financial contribution of overseas students to English universities and the classification of such students in Government immigration statistics.
Virendra Kumar Sharma (Labour, Centre-left): In light of recent exit check data, which show that the number of students who have overstayed is very low, will the Government introduce measures to grow the number of international students coming to UK universities?
Social Mobility: Disadvantaged Areas — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Mary Helen Creagh (Labour, Centre-left): Pupils at the 21 schools managed by Wakefield City Academies Trust are among the most disadvantaged in the country. The collapse of the trust on Friday came as a bolt from the blue to them, their parents and their teachers. A leaked report in November found: that the trust was predicted to be £16 million in deficit; that hundreds of thousands of pounds had been spent on an interim educational consultant; and that Wakefield City high school did not even know which pupils were in receipt of pupil premium. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to make sure disadvantaged children do not miss out as a result of financial mismanagement and her Department’s incompetence?
Social Mobility: Disadvantaged Areas — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The answer from the Secretary of State on Wakefield City Academies Trust was just not good enough, and not fair on parents, pupils—most importantly—and teachers at Freeston Academy in my constituency and many other academies. They had this announcement in the first week of the new school year—out of the blue—yet it turns out that there have been huge problems with the trust for a long time, on governance, finance, accountability and performance. Her Department has been pushing all of these schools into this model. Is it not time she had a full review of the complete failure of local accountability in these multi-academy trusts, and made sure there is enough finance and support in place for the pupils in my constituency so that they do not lose out as a result of this failed management?
Free Childcare — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: What assessment she has made of the effect of the Government's policy on 30 hours of free childcare on the financial viability of childcare settings.; What assessment she has made of the effect of the Government's policy on 30 hours of free childcare on the financial viability of childcare settings.
Daniel Joseph Carden (Labour, Centre-left): In Liverpool, Walton, 36% of children are growing up in poverty, and unemployment is twice the national average. Did Ministers give any thought to how this policy would only further entrench the development gap between those most disadvantaged children still just getting the 15 hours a week and those with parents in secure employment getting the 30 hours a week?
Reception: Starting Age — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): Surely the Minister realises that, while it is true that the summer-born question is difficult and complex, it must be linked with a terrible stain on our education policy: the fact that little children who have been identified as bright up to the age of 11 are lost to the education system post-11. What is going on with the failed policies of a Government who cannot help kids who are bright at 11 and who disappear afterwards?
Reception: Starting Age — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Lucy Maria Powell (Labour, Centre-left): As my summer-born son starts his first day in reception today, I am all too well aware that the big gaps in attainment among his classmates are related not to the time of year when they were born, but to whether they come from advantaged or disadvantaged backgrounds. That is still the biggest problem facing our education system. Does the Minister agree that it needs to be tackled? If so, how does he square that with findings that I published last week with the Social Market Foundation, showing that 75% of the extra money that the Government are pumping into the early years will go to better-off families and less than 3% will go to those who are disadvantaged?
Child Nutrition — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Gavin Shuker (Labour, Centre-left): May I commend to the Secretary of State the private Member’s Bill tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Frank Field), which will tackle the problem properly by ensuring that children who receive free school meals in term time also receive nutritious meals outside term time? If she feels that she cannot offer Government support for the Bill, may I also commend to her a charity in my constituency, Make Lunch, which is now providing meals in 50 locations —entrepreneurially, off its own bat—to tackle the problem, and will she arrange a short meeting with a Minister to discuss it?
Child Nutrition — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Social Welfare
Frank Field (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Secretary of State take her lead from the Prime Minister, and welcome the Bill to abolish school hunger for millions of children, and might she follow the Prime Minister’s lead in bringing together the relevant Ministers, and then give us the parliamentary time so that Back Benchers on both sides of the House can finish the job for her?
University Education: Access — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
John Woodcock (Labour, Centre-left): Disadvantaged children cannot get to university if they do not get the grades in the first place, so will the Minister ask the schools Minister to meet us in the Furness area who are looking at a major new initiative to get the private-sector local employees involved in closing the generations-long gap in GCSE numeracy and literacy attainment?
PE and Sport Premium — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Questions: What steps her Department is taking to measure the effect of the PE and sport premium on childhood inactivity over the 2017-18 academic year.
Emma Louise Lewell-Buck (Labour, Centre-left): The Government’s plans to address childhood inactivity should include healthy pupils capital funding. In February, the Secretary of State was clear that the amount schools would receive would not fall below £415 million, but just last week the Minister admitted that more than £300 million has been cut from that very programme, in a desperate attempt to prop up a falling schools budget—another broken promise to pupils across the country. How many projects will not go ahead because of those cuts, and how many children will lose out?
Teacher Shortages — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Jeffrey Smith (Labour, Centre-left): That is a very complacent answer. The Secretary of State’s predecessor, the right hon. Member for Loughborough (Nicky Morgan), said that the public sector pay cap is having a clear impact on recruitment and retention. Does the Minister agree with his right hon. Friend that the policy makes it harder to recruit the teachers we need?
Teacher Shortages — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Angela Rayner (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Jeff Smith) made a very good point, and the School Teachers Review Body, the Education Select Committee and the Secretary of State’s predecessor have all said that pay has contributed to the crisis in teacher recruitment, but—notably—not the Prime Minister. Last week, our research showed that the Government’s freeze and cap on public sector pay has left the average teacher more than £5,000 a year worse off. Will the Secretary of State get the cap lifted for schools or is she telling us that nothing has changed?
Teaching Assistants: Recruitment and Retention — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Labor
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): That answer is simply not good enough. Low pay is a barrier to the recruitment and retention of teaching assistants. Figures from the GMB’s pay pinch report, taking the consumer prices index into consideration, show that a higher level teaching assistant has lost £9,200 over the past seven years and that that will rise to over £12,000 by 2020 unless something is done about the public sector pay cap. Is it not time that we stopped hearing weasel words from the Government about how much they value those staff and that they started to pay them the rate for the job?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Education
Questions: As the Secretary of State is aware, apprentices and technical education are an important part of our educational offering, and I am fortunate in my constituency to have an excellent-rated apprenticeship provider called In-Comm. What more are the Government doing to increase the number of high-quality apprenticeships for young people?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Centre-left): Last week’s stunning National Audit Office report said that the Department for Education could not show that £200 million from LIBOR funds pledged by the Government for 50,000 apprenticeships for unemployed 22 to 24-year-olds had actually been used for that purpose. Eighteen months ago, when I tabled four parliamentary questions on the issue, Ministers ducked and dodged answering. Was the £200 million shoved down a Treasury sofa, or was it just pocketed by DFE? What is the Secretary of State going to do now that the NAO has found the Government out?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: International Affairs
Frank Field (Labour, Centre-left): I can be mercifully brief. I wish to make two points. First, I will vote tonight for the only option that implements the referendum result. That was the wish of my constituents and that was the wish of the country. I do not wish any different view to be put forward about whose side I am on—I am on the side of the majority of people who voted to come out Secondly, I want to address those on the Government Benches. When we started this process, many people bravely went against their lifetime views to implement the views of their constituents, but given the frailty of human nature we have had one or two recidivists who are now thinking, having read Thursday’s debate, that there may be reasons for not doing this or not doing the other. When we come back in Committee, I will table a four-clause Bill, because the Government, by having this mega-Bill, are storing up no end of trouble from Members who are wolves in sheep’s clothing and who will try to undo the measure We need four crucial things from that Bill. First, we need a leave date. Secondly, we need to incorporate all European Union law and regulations. The third clause will give us the means by which the House of Commons and then their lordships review which laws we want to keep, which we want to improve, and which we want to do away with. We are voting from midnight tonight, and there is talk that it will be 3 o’clock on Wednesday morning before we vote on tomorrow’s business. With regard to the idea that this place is equipped to review all that legislation, there is shedloads upon shedloads upon shedloads, and it would fill up the House of Commons on several occasions. We therefore need a means whereby we review which legislation we will keep and which we will not. Fourthly, in case there are problems with people with their little hands on our windpipes who think, "If we can hold them to the two years, we will get what we want", we need a safe haven That is what we need from this exit Bill: first, the date; secondly, the incorporation of everything; thirdly, a method of review; and fourthly, for a limited period, a safe haven. I hope that when we go into Committee, the Government will adopt those four proposals as clause 1 so that we can very quickly implement this Bill. We can then bring forward small Bills to implement other parts of the mega-Bill they are putting before us, should we need them. I hope that when the whole House of Commons is in Committee, we will carry that amendment.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: International Affairs
Wayne David (Labour, Centre-left): Although I campaigned and argued for this country to remain a part of the European Union, I fully accept that that is not the majority view of the country. But I would argue that this is the wrong way to leave the European Union. This is not a general enabling Bill; it is a poorly thought-out, complex and undemocratic piece of legislation. One of the most fundamental problems with the Bill is that it amounts to—yes—a power grab by this Government. That power grab takes several forms, but I want to focus on just two aspects First, there is the widespread use of Henry VIII powers, allowing the Government effectively to bypass Parliament and change primary legislation through secondary legislation. That has, of course, happened in the past, but not on such a huge scale as is planned now. As a result of this Bill, we will see extensive use of those undemocratic powers, because some 12,000 EU regulations will be brought into UK law. Some of them will make changes for technical reasons, but, as the most recent paper from the House of Commons Library states, it is anticipated that others will enable "substantive policy changes" to be made by the Government. So changes are likely to be introduced through Committees, which is why the Government are doing their best to pack those Committees with their own MPs, against the established procedure of the House We are also seeing an unprecedented power grab with regard to devolution. As a Welsh Member of Parliament and a former Wales Office Minister, I have followed devolution very closely. Many of us expected, as did the devolved institutions themselves, that this Bill would make real the promises the Government set out in their White Paper.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-11
Topic: Government Operations
Wayne David (Labour, Centre-left): There are many speakers, as we have heard, and I am sorry, but I would rather press on In the White Paper of March 2017, it was stated that there would be a significant increase in the decision-making powers of the devolved institutions. That was there in black and white. It also intimated that former EU frameworks would be subject to decisions involving the devolved Governments, but such is not the case. The Bill before us does not return powers from the EU to the devolved institutions, as promised. Instead, in devolved areas, such as agriculture and the environment, power is going from Brussels to London, bypassing and therefore undermining devolution. Moreover, this Bill in effect imposes a freeze on the legislative competences of the devolved institutions. As a report by the Welsh Assembly research department points out, the devolved institutions will not be able to modify so-called retained EU law for Wales and Scotland, but a Conservative British Government will be able to do so for England, and may even be able to do so for the devolved nations.