argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Immigration
Angela Christine Smith (Labour, Centre-left): The political declaration contains some interesting additions from last week’s draft, including paragraph 54, which states: "The Parties also agree to consider addressing social security coordination in the light of future movement of persons." That sounds as though EU nationals working in the UK under the terms of the agreement could continue claiming benefits from our benefits system. Can the Prime Minister clarify?
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Other
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): Further to the Prime Minister’s last answer on the meaningful vote, will she make it clear that she and her new Brexit Secretary accept the recommendations of the Procedure Committee to have the votes and debates on amendments before the debate and vote on the main motion?
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): The hallmark of this process has been slogans and empty platitudes, and I am afraid that this document just continues that run of poor form. May I draw the Prime Minister’s attention specifically to paragraph 24, which says: "The Parties will also explore the possibility of cooperation of United Kingdom authorities with Union agencies such as the European Medicines Agency" May I remind the Prime Minister that in July this House voted to remain part of the European Medicines Agency? She will remember it because the amendment was proposed by her neighbour, the hon. Member for Bracknell (Dr Lee). Why is she ignoring the will of the House?
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): On financial services, the Prime Minister said that equivalence would not be withdrawn on a whim. Will she tell the House what she meant by that? At the moment, equivalence for a third country can be withdrawn by the European Union at 30 days’ notice, as Switzerland is now experiencing. Will it be different for the UK?
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Mixed Topics
Martin David Whitfield (Labour, Centre-left): Breaking up is clearly quite hard to do, but at least the Prime Minister has a sum in mind to pay out, but what about our pan-European families where there is a break-up and the stress of that situation, where we have children who are trying to seek access to parents and where we have lone parents trying to get assets and payments for their children? Are we really only to explore options, confirmed in paragraph 58, "for judicial cooperation in matrimonial, parental responsibility" Is that genuinely as far as we can go to make that helpful for families?
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Immigration
Michael Joseph Patrick Kane (Labour, Centre-left): I genuinely believe that this is a bad deal for the north of England. Manchester airport in my constituency caters for 30 million passengers, but the Prime Minister’s favourite rhetoric is about ending free movement. Does she not acknowledge that that works both ways? Why on earth should I vote for a deal that restricts the right of workers to travel and work abroad?
Progress on EU Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-11-22
Topic: Mixed Topics
Daniel Stephen Zeichner (Labour, Centre-left): I have listened closely to the answers that the Prime Minister has given to questions about relationships with agencies such as the European Medicines Agency. People think that this is a deal, but it is not; it is the start of a long and complex negotiation. She will know that representatives of the life sciences sector have said that it is essential for our future that we have full membership of these agencies. Are they wrong?
Leaving the EU: Fishing Industry — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the fishing industry in Scotland on access to UK fishing waters after the UK leaves the EU.
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State claims that this deal is a good deal, but on fishing, that claim was blown out of the water by President Macron of France before the ink was dry on the political declaration. The reality is that the Secretary of State cannot guarantee that the UK will not be pushed into the backstop indefinitely if access to waters and quota shares are not agreed with the European Union. That is an undeniable breach of his red line. He promised to resign over that very issue, yet he is still here, desperately claiming the false choice between no deal and a bad deal. When did he realise that he cared more about his ministerial Merc than about a good deal for Scotland’s fishermen?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: No one can question the Prime Minister’s work ethic and determination to reach a deal with the European Union—a deal that many people thought unachievable—but despite her best endeavours, many people still have considerable concerns that this has left us with an uncomfortable choice, and I share those concerns. As the Prime Minister heads to Scotland, what guarantees can she give to those who have concerns about the future of the fishing industry under this deal, and also our precious Union?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor said: "What we are not going to do is publish the raw legal advice from the Attorney General" The Prime Minister herself wanted to see legal advice in the past, and MPs need to see the advice, warts and all, so that they can make their informed decision on this matter The Prime Minister insists that her Government will be able to negotiate every aspect of the UK’s future trade relationship with Europe within the space of two years. We have had two and a half years since the referendum; so far, 20 of her own Ministers have resigned. This is the most shambolic Government in living memory, and she is now asking Parliament to vote on the basis of a 26-page wishlist without even seeing the full legal advice. It is now clear that Parliament will not back this plan, so is it not time for her to accept that reality and make way for an alternative plan that could work for the whole country?
Leaving the EU: Economic Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Catherine McKinnell (Labour, Centre-left): The analysis published by the Government today, while not entirely clear in its picture, does highlight the specific impact that a bad Brexit would have on the north-east region. Today’s figures provide the modelling for the north-east against a Chequers deal and an average free trade arrangement, but uses no deal as a base for that analysis. Can the Minister confirm today the impact on the economy of the north-east of a no deal and the Government’s intended deal as compared with the status quo—remaining in the EU?
Leaving the EU: Economic Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker—I think On reflection, it was probably quite wise of the Chancellor not to come here to give this statement. He definitely owes the junior Minister a stiff drink afterwards, because he is not waving, but drowning, especially as in this dodgy prospectus he has essentially admitted that we will not know on what free trade agreement the country is being asked to vote on 11 December. Does he not realise that the reason so many Members will not buy the dodgy sales pitch he is peddling today is that nobody is convinced about this Brexit lottery and just being told "Have faith, keep your fingers crossed, go with us in this giant leap in the dark"?
Leaving the EU: Economic Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Immigration
Katherine Anne Green (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has been at pains to make it clear that he is speaking to a Government-wide document, so may I ask him about an aspect of Government policy that will be material to the economic outcome of whatever deal the Government bring forward—that is, policy in relation to migration? Despite promises of an immigration White Paper, last year through to this summer, it is still not in front of us. Will the Minister guarantee that we will have that White Paper, clarity about the Government’s immigration policy choices and a proper economic analysis of their impact, in time for the vote on 11 December?
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister appreciate the serious concern in the British Sikh community about people being in possession of a kirpan? As president of Gatka Federation UK, I know that many people are concerned about the practice of that Sikh martial art. Various individuals and organisations, including the Sikh Council UK and the Sikh Federation UK, have expressed solid concerns, and I think that an amendment has also been tabled. I hope that the Minister can allay those genuine concerns.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Ruth Margaret Cadbury (Labour, Centre-left): I should like to thank the Minister for her response to the amendment on the possession of the kirpan, the religious sword that is used by Sikhs. My hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra) and I represent a large Sikh community, and they have been very concerned about the omission in the Bill. We would also like to congratulate the all-party parliamentary group for British Sikhs on the work that it has done, and we thank the Minister and the Secretary of State for their willingness to listen and to act on behalf of the Sikh community.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): I should like to thank the Minister for the open, listening approach that she has taken in response to representations from myself, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Preet Kaur Gill), the right hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve), the Sikh Federation and others who have contacted her. Can she clarify that the effect of the Government amendments to the Bill will be to maintain the status quo as far as Sikh religious practice is concerned? That is all that the community were asking for throughout this process, and if that is what the amendments will do, I believe that they will be warmly welcomed.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): If all the Minister says is true, why has every retail organisation in the country, and the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, argued in favour of new clause 1, which I shall be moving shortly?
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Matthew Toby Perkins (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Lady is very kind. She says that she will speak to her committee of retail representatives about why they feel this is necessary, but should she not have done that before rejecting the amendment? It is clear that they are saying it is necessary, so it is a little late for her to say she will vote against the amendment while saying she will start consulting on it.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Louise Margaret Haigh (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister is absolutely right that new clause 5 would impose a blanket ban on retailers displaying bladed products, but the Government are proposing a blanket ban on the sale of bladed products to residential premises. Why is it one rule for online and another for face-to-face retailers?
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Anna Catherine Turley (Labour, Centre-left): I appreciate the Minister’s generosity. I hope to speak to those amendments but if time eludes me, fair enough; that is why I want to raise this issue now. Have the Government done an impact assessment of the implications of these measures for online retailers? I speak on behalf of a constituent who runs a DIY shop, and thinks that the implications would be in the region of £30,000 if he was unable to sell wallpaper scrapers and specific DIY knives to residential addresses.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Gareth Craig Snell (Labour, Centre-left): I, too, support my right hon. Friend’s new clause 1. Does he agree that there is a particular point about staff in small shops that are often open until 8, 9 or 10 o’clock at night? The shop will often be the only place open in that community and not in an area where people are walking past. The one or two staff in there could find themselves under immense pressure from people wanting to buy substances, and they have to reject them with nobody about to help.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): Indeed. My new clause—if adopted, or if the Minister looks at this as part of age-related sales—would give additional protection to shop workers who are upholding the legislation that this Government have introduced The Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, of which I am a proud member and which—I declare an interest—gives some support to my constituency party, supports my new clause. The Co-op party, the co-op movement, the Association of Convenience Stores, the British Retail Consortium and the National Federation of Retail Newsagents all support the new clause publicly and visibly because they recognise that they have a duty of care to their staff This matters because, in the past 10 years, we have seen a rise in the incidence of assaults on and threatening behaviour towards retail staff. An USDAW survey showed last year that 66% of staff have reported verbal abuse, and the number who reported threats of physical violence increased to 42% in the past year alone.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): My new clause would give added protection, but more importantly, it would show retail staff on the frontline that we are on their side, backing them up and giving them the support they need The British Retail Consortium and the Association of Convenience Stores have identified violence to staff as the most significant risk in the sector. The National Federation of Retail Newsagents has published research showing that there are 2,300 incidents daily among its members. The Association of Convenience Stores has said that enforcing the law on age-restricted sales is one of the biggest triggers of abuse against people working in convenience stores. The British Retail Consortium has said that age verification checks are one of the key triggers for attacks. USDAW has said that shop workers are on the frontline of helping to keep our community safe, so their role should be valued and they deserve our respect. The Co-op and police and crime commissioners such as Paddy Tipping in Nottingham have said the same If the Minister can agree to this new clause or take it away and look at the general principle with the National Police Chiefs Council, she will be standing shoulder to shoulder with every member of staff who is upholding the law. She will be saying that she is with them and protecting them. She should do the right thing. The 15,000 members of the National Federation of Retail Newsagents want this new clause. The British Retail Consortium, representing 70% of retail trade, wants this new clause. The Association of Convenience Stores, representing 33,000 stores, wants this. The Co-op group wants it. The Co-op party wants it, and the USDAW trade union wants it. It seems that the only person who does not is the Minister. I know that she is concerned about this issue. I ask her to reflect upon it, to support this new clause and to work with those bodies to come to a solution that protects retail staff who are enforcing the legislation that this House has enacted.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Anna Catherine Turley (Labour, Centre-left): I rise to support my two amendments, amendments 1 and 2, with regard to a specific constituency case I mentioned earlier to the Minister. I am afraid her response did not go quite far enough to satisfy me, so I would like to press my case a bit further My point refers specifically to an online decorating business in my constituency, which expressed deep concerns that the proposed legislation could potentially force them out of business. My constituent estimates that were the Bill to be enacted as it stands, he would lose approximately £32,000 per year. That is probably enough to destroy a small business. He currently sells a number of bladed decorating tools, including bladed paint scrapers, craft knives, safety knives and utility blades—all very niche tools for the DIY trade. These items are delivered to residential addresses and so the provisions under clause 17 could potentially make a significant part of his trade illegal There could also be a wider impact on the rest of his business. As customers often purchase those items with other decorating materials such as wallpaper and paint, my constituent is concerned that if people are forced to visit decorating stores to buy a single tool, such as a scraper or a knife, they will buy all their decorating materials and bladed items there in one go. That would have a huge impact on his business.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): I wonder whether my hon. Friend has seen, as I think would be the case under the Bill, that people like her constituent would not be able to post those products to somebody’s home, whereas somebody selling identical products from overseas would freely be able to carry on sending them by post to the purchaser.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): I happily accept the Minister’s offer to revisit this with the trade unions and shop organisations. The reason why new clause 1 would cover only corrosives and knives is because that is the scope of the Bill; it should cover age-related products. I would welcome it if we can reflect on that, but I reserve the right to return to the matter in another place should the meeting not prove successful.
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): I can now inform the House that the Speaker has completed certification of the Bill, as required by the Standing Order. Copies of the final certificate will be made available in the Vote Office and on the parliamentary website Under Standing Order No. 83M, a consent motion is therefore required for the Bill to proceed. Copies of the motion are available in the Vote Office and on the parliamentary website and have been made available to Members in the Chamber. Does the Minister intend to move the consent motion?
Offensive Weapons Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-28
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): It is the convention for any Member going to another Member’s constituency to carry out political business to inform the Member concerned, whether that be the Prime Minister or whoever. Please, do the right thing by colleagues and always inform the Member you are going. You do not have to meet the Member, but at least let us keep with convention. That is the advice that I would give. I am sure that hon. Gentleman will remind the Secretary of State when he catches up with him and has a debrief on his constituency, and I am sure that it will be a great pleasure for him to receive that debriefing.
Budget 2018: Disabled People — House of Commons, 2018-11-19
Topic: Mixed Topics
Paul Daniel Williams (Labour, Centre-left): That may be so, but the charity Scope reports that the disability employment gap has remained stubbornly at 30% for about a decade. Will the Minister make a bold commitment to disabled people up and down the country and reinstate the previous target of halving the disability employment gap?
Universal Credit Managed Migration — House of Commons, 2018-11-19
Topic: Immigration
Questions: What steps her Department is taking to identify people on legacy benefits with high support needs who will be required to transfer to universal credit managed migration.
Helen Elizabeth Hayes (Labour, Centre-left): None of the changes to universal credit managed migration that were announced in the Budget will help people whose debilitating mental illness means that they are too anxious and unwell to open their post and are deeply fearful of any new assessment process. I welcome the new Secretary of State to her post, but what will she do to ensure that no one is left without income during the managed migration process, and will she commit to halt the roll-out until such a guarantee can be given?
Universal Credit: Rent Arrears — House of Commons, 2018-11-19
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister knows that the five-week delay under universal credit forces people into debt right at the start of their claim, which too often leads to rent arrears and other hardships. I welcome the new Secretary of State to her post. Will the Minister encourage her to take a fresh look at this indefensible five-week delay in particular?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-11-19
Topic: Housing
Questions: A constituent of mine who is currently claiming the personal independence payment has been told that she will need to undergo reassessment just one month before she is migrated on to the state pension. She is concerned that this will cost more than the amount she will get for that extra month; is this process correct, and what will happen when she gets her state pension?; May I also say how nice it is to see the Secretary of State back on the Front Bench? Will she look at improving access to universal credit for those leaving prison, so that those who have left prison will not face delays in getting money in their pocket and thus be driven back into a cycle of crime?; My constituent Natalie Tingle works hard in her job and as a student, but is £400 a month worse off after switching to universal credit and losing child tax credit. She now gets just £12 a month, as her student loan is counted as income, and she is getting into debt. Will the Minister investigate her circumstances and find a way to help?; I am very grateful to Crawley DWP staff, who successfully helped with the transition to universal credit in June. Will my right hon. Friend update the House on the support available to claimants who are transferring?; May I also welcome the Secretary of State to her post on the Front Bench? In the past I have mentioned the problem of the lack of online access in the remotest parts of my constituency, but in addition there is the problem of people in my constituency who cannot, as we say in the highlands, work a computer. They do not have the skills. What is going to be done to address that issue?; I have received a letter from a constituent who is a universal credit caseworker. She describes overworked staff looking after so many cases that people receive payments only when they complain. Will the Minister respond to this whistleblower’s allegation of chaos?
Stephanie Louise Peacock (Labour, Centre-left): In March, I wrote to the DWP regarding a systematic error in the housing element of universal credit that was incorrectly deducting £70 from claims. I was assured that the fault was known and the fix was on its way, but eight months later my constituents are still having their money taken. When will the Government sort out this mess?