argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Robert Edward Jenrick (Conservative, Centre-right): Gladstone, one of my predecessors as Member of Parliament for Newark, made a similar proposal to the one before us and then the Liberal Prime Minister Asquith, 100 years ago, proposed what then might have been called the "Westmeath question" in exactly the same way, through the Standing Orders of the House. Whether or not one agrees with it, it is therefore a completely bogus argument to say that this is a novel approach. This approach of using the Standing Orders of the House has existed for 150 years.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Graham Charles Stuart (Conservative, Centre-right): Hospitals and schools in Wales that are used by English people are controlled entirely through the devolution settlement and determined by those in Wales. That is as it should be. There may be voices created for those coming over. We could have whole vast sections of tourism dependent entirely on English tourists, but that does not stop the Welsh Assembly deciding the policies that apply. Exactly the same mirror should apply. Something that affects only English hospitals should be determined with the consent—only the consent—of the English.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
David Ian Jones (Conservative, Centre-right): I agree, and is that not the point of the debate that we are having and of the consultation that we are going through? Therefore, does he agree that what is needed is a mechanism to be put in place to ensure that representations can be made, for example, by the hon. Gentleman?
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Graham Charles Stuart (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman has set out his case cogently, but it is not right. He says that he will not be able to make representations, but he will be. It would be really good if he could acknowledge that. He will be playing a full part. He says that he will not be able to table an amendment, but he will be. It is just that if the matter is English-only he will not be able to vote on it. His case is absolutely bankrupt.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Civil Rights
Antoinette Geraldine Sherratt (Sandbach) (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman’s example is somewhat disingenuous, because Welsh language issues are devolved to and dealt with by the Assembly, whereas no criminal justice issues are devolved, and therefore that is dealt with as an English and Welsh matter.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Civil Rights
Thérèse Anne Coffey (Conservative, Centre-right): I think the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Antoinette Sandbach) is making is that because the Welsh language with regard to the Welsh courts is a devolved matter, it is likely that the UK Government would be unable to legislate on it unless we had the consent of the Welsh Assembly.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alberto Castrenze Costa (Conservative, Centre-right): I applaud the hon. Gentleman for speaking up for the United Kingdom, which he has just mentioned. He is talking about fairness, so will he answer this question? My South Leicestershire constituents told me in the lead-up to the election that they have a problem with the current Labour form of the devolution settlement. What is his response to my constituents who are unhappy with the imbalance, but want to safeguard the United Kingdom, as he does, against the wishes of the Scottish National party?
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alberto Castrenze Costa (Conservative, Centre-right): My right hon. Friend should not be surprised at all. This is all part and parcel of the Scottish National party strategy, which is to foster grievance upon the nations of the United Kingdom. There will be more to come.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
David Ian Jones (Conservative, Centre-right): I was coming to exactly that point. As I said in an intervention on the hon. Member for Wrexham, a mechanism has to be devised so that in areas of doubt, of which there will be many, the Speaker can apprise himself of Members’ views and take any wider evidence he requires to make that determination. It seems to me that there would be nothing to preclude him from doing so on the basis of the draft Standing Orders as they stand. My suggestion to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House is that an amendment to the draft Standing Orders should be made in order to accommodate that very procedure.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. These interventions are, in equal measure, stimulating and a tad over long. I am referring not simply to the hon. Lady, but to a number of others and we must stop a trend developing, much as it is displeasing to interrupt the hon. Lady, whose flow I always enjoy.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
William Nigel Paul Cash (Conservative, Centre-right): As the hon. Gentleman well knows, I am extremely sympathetic to all matters relating to Northern Ireland, but I just want to ask him one question. It is completely mind-boggling to imagine how anybody will make their way through 30 pages of proposed changes to Standing Orders, so is he attracted to my proposal, which would simple do it by order of the Speaker and in seven lines, which would at least bring clarity?
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Graham Charles Stuart (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman started his speech by going on about how little impact the proposal would have, suggesting that only the buses Bill would be affected in this Session, but then he moved on to say that it fans the flames of separatism. He cannot have it both ways. It is a relatively modest measure for giving consent. He is the one fanning the flames of separatism. No matter what we do in this place, the Scottish nationalists will claim that it is an appalling assault. I am surprised that a Unionist like him would fall for their guff.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Dominic Charles Roberts Grieve (Conservative, Centre-right): No. I am afraid that distinction exists only in the mind of the hon. Gentleman. If I may say so, that is entirely illustrative of the sort of myth that illuminates the lives of Scottish nationalists, but has no relation to reality whatsoever. The Queen is the servant, through her coronation oath, of the citizens of this country, and we in this Parliament—and, indeed, Ministers—do our best to serve the Queen in the fulfilment of her oath. That serves the people just as adequately as any of the other rationalisations that the hon. Gentleman may have, so I will not hear any more of that, thank you very much.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
William Nigel Paul Cash (Conservative, Centre-right): I have already referred to the fact that I tried to resolve the West Lothian question by proposing amendments to Standing Orders. In 1998, I also proposed that the whole matter should be referred to a referendum in the whole of the United Kingdom, because we were all affected by it. Half the Conservative Members walked past the Whips to support me on that, but the Government would not of course accept it.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Antoinette Geraldine Sherratt (Sandbach) (Conservative, Centre-right): It is a great pleasure to follow the maiden speech of the hon. Member for Glasgow North East (Anne McLaughlin), who will clearly be a strong voice for her constituents. Like her, in my maiden speech I emphasised the character and resilience of my constituents. We have that in common. The contributions that our constituents make to civil society are extremely important, and I am glad that she raised those matters in her maiden speech as that is an experience that many of us across the House share Once again, I rise to speak on English votes for English laws, which I raised in my maiden speech. It was with some surprise that I listened to the shadow Leader of the House talk about the need for a constitutional convention, because, of course, when the devolution Bills were debated, as my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve) has so ably pointed out, these matters were raised time and again. It is clear that in 13 years or more in government, the Opposition had more than ample time to set up that constitutional convention and failed to do so. It seems to me that they are making those calls too late. I am afraid that my constituents, like those of many other Government Members who have spoken, have waited long enough. They have had to sit back and watch the inherent unfairness in the system. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis) has so ably said, we need to concentrate on making sure that just as there should not be two classes of MP, there should not be two classes of citizen The difficulty is that my constituents very much feel that they are second-class citizens. As so many other Members have said of them, they do not want an English Assembly. It is extraordinary that the SNP has come here and suggested to me, as my constituents’ representative, that my constituents should not be allowed to choose how they wish their devolution to be expressed. The SNP might want them to have an English Parliament, but it is not appropriate for them to be dictated to about a form of democracy or how they want it to be exercised My constituents were asked about this at the election. We stood on a manifesto that included a commitment to English voters, and my constituents made it very clear that they did not want a separate English Assembly.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Civil Rights
Antoinette Geraldine Sherratt (Sandbach) (Conservative, Centre-right): I am sorry. I wish to make some progress I ask for parity of treatment between my constituents in my English constituency and the people I represented in Wales. I do not accept it when Labour Members stand up in this House and make an argument about second-class MPs. The reality is that without this change we have second-class citizens in England who do not have the protection given to those in Wales and Scotland. It is time for that fundamental injustice to be put right. I very much support the moves made by the Leader of the House.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
David Ian Jones (Conservative, Centre-right): The right hon. Gentleman will know that I share many of the concerns he is expressing. He asks what influence he can have over the process. It seems to me that a dual test is set out on the draft Standing Order. One test is that a matter should relate "exclusively to England". To follow his example of the hospital scenario, that clearly does not relate exclusively to England, because it serves a large number of Welsh patients. Does he not agree that what we really need is to build a mechanism into the Standing Order to clarify that point?
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Edward Julian Egerton Leigh (Conservative, Centre-right): Last week I and some other Members mentioned these Barnett consequentials and expressed our concern about that. The Government deserve some credit for the fact that they have listened to the points we made and the Leader of the House has amended his Standing Orders to ensure, as I understand it, that proposals relating to the Barnett consequentials have been withdrawn. I see the Leader of the House has just come back into the Chamber and I would like to publicly pay tribute to him for having handled this issue in a model way and listened to representations.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Thérèse Anne Coffey (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Lady will recognise that the Government realised there was a problem with that and it has been corrected. I believe that the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) has a letter to that effect.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): With due respect to the hon. Lady, I remind her that were such a Bill to exist—and it certainly will not under this Government—it would have a money resolution that she would be able to vote on. Can she name a single measure on which she would be excluded from a vote to decide whether it should become law?
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): I reiterate that the rules that apply to every Committee of this House as regards who can participate and who cannot, and when Members can turn up and take part and when they cannot, will not change.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Dominic Charles Roberts Grieve (Conservative, Centre-right): I am listening carefully to what the hon. Gentleman has to say. I can see that he can make an argument against the change to Standing Orders. As I said in my own speech, I can see why that might be troubling. However, the background issue of how we organise ourselves within the United Kingdom and the structures we should have that respect the individual component parts and do justice to English identity is not going away, and I do not think that it is artificial.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Christopher Stephen Grayling (Conservative, Centre-right): I appreciate that the hon. Gentleman is new to this House, but if a Member is not formally a voting member of a Committee there are plenty of opportunities to participate in its proceedings. That will not change. [Interruption.] The right hon. Member for Gordon (Alex Salmond) intervenes from a sedentary position. The reason the paper does not say there is a change to the Standing Orders is that the situation will not change.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Dominic Charles Roberts Grieve (Conservative, Centre-right): The one merit or demerit of the proposal is that the Standing Orders are voted on by everybody. If the circumstances described by the hon. Gentleman arose, I have no doubt that the Labour Government would change the Standing Orders.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Thérèse Anne Coffey (Conservative, Centre-right): I want to get through my speech and perhaps take interventions a bit later if that is okay Legislation has been mentioned. We genuinely have concerns, as do the Clerks of the House, about whether this risks being justiciable. That said, several representations have been made in debates. The Government are not ruling it out, but we do not believe that it would be the right vehicle to do this. That might be something for the Procedure Committee to look at. If it does not necessarily do so in its short investigation, it is more likely to do so during the one that will take the 12 months before we review the process, as we have agreed to do.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Thérèse Anne Coffey (Conservative, Centre-right): I will not if that is okay, because I am trying to respond to the points made in the debate. [Interruption.] It is not an unfair quote; it is from paragraph 12 I just want to be clear because I am a little confused by what the hon. Member for Scunthorpe (Nic Dakin) said. He seemed to accept the principle of an England-only Committee or an England and Wales-only Committee, despite having agreed earlier with the right hon. Member for Delyn (Mr Hanson) that that would exclude him from something, so I am a little confused about that.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Thérèse Anne Coffey (Conservative, Centre-right): Not at the moment, because I am making progress in responding to the debate The position on reasons is in line with that for similar decisions the Speaker makes. That will preserve the authority and impartiality of the Chair.
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
William David Wiggin (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have noticed that the hon. Member for Blackley and Broughton (Graham Stringer) has been missed off the list of names in motion No. 4 on the Order Paper. I believe that to be an accidental clerical error, but I understand that he cannot be part of the Committee, despite being elected by his party and having been passed by the Committee of Selection. Could you use your good offices to ensure that he is able to get the papers necessary for the European Scrutiny Committee to meet on Tuesday so that he can do his homework?
English Votes for English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): I understand the hon. Gentleman’s annoyance at there being a mistake on the Order Paper. As Mr Speaker would always say, there should not be a mistake on the Order Paper, and I am sure that the hon. Member for Blackley and Broughton (Graham Stringer), and both Committees, will receive an apology for that mistake. The solution to the matter is for a further motion to be submitted, which I understand is on the Order Paper for tomorrow. Therefore, the matter can be raised again tomorrow, and the hon. Gentleman duly added to the Committee.
London’s Licensed Taxi Trade — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Victoria Lorne Peta Borwick (Conservative, Centre-right): I declare a slight interest, as my husband was running the company that made the taxis when they became fully accessible to the disabled. I have spoken before about my concern for the disabled, so may I ask first whether my hon. Friend agrees that only fully accessible taxis should be allowed to ply for hire on the streets of London? Does he also agree that all vehicles should be subject to the same stringent standards and regulations as our gold standard taxi fleet?
London’s Licensed Taxi Trade — House of Commons, 2015-07-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Victoria Lorne Peta Borwick (Conservative, Centre-right): The Minister makes an important point about quantity. We are talking about the free flow of London traffic, and although we have seen this explosion in the number of private hire vehicles, it cannot be said to contribute to the smooth running of London or to reducing pollution levels in London. When considering legislation or regulation, I hope he might consider whether we need all these private hire vehicles. Are they not just polluting and clogging up our streets? As he said, he is fortunate to be healthy enough to ride a bicycle, for which I commend him, but he will be breathing in the fumes of all these private hire vehicles.
Riot Compensation Bill — House of Commons, 2015-12-04
Topic: Domestic Commerce
David John Barrington Burrowes (Conservative, Centre-right): My constituency was a victim of the riots in 2011, when there were huge disturbances on the streets of Enfield. For some businesses in my constituency and in Enfield North the problem was not just liability and who would pay, but the time it took to be paid. The delay was an ongoing victimisation of those businesses and their prospects of continuing. Will the Bill help to improve the decision-making process and lead to such businesses getting the money they deserve?
Riot Compensation Bill — House of Commons, 2015-12-04
Topic: Housing
Michael Jon Wood (Conservative, Centre-right): A key purpose of the Bill is indeed to have a more effective, streamlined and clear mechanism or procedure to enable those businesses and individuals to get the compensation they need within the timeframe necessary to make a difference in getting their lives and businesses back on track In 2011, the coalition Government responded to the riots by agreeing to cover the costs incurred by the police in compensating homeowners and businesses under the Riot (Damages) Act 1886. That was one part of the package that the then Government announced in response to the scale of the destruction suffered in some of our major cities. I am sure that Members on both sides of the Chamber recognise the importance of the creation of a high street recovery fund immediately after those riots, which helped local communities to decide for themselves on measures, specific and relevant to their area, that would get their high streets back on their feet. However, we cannot necessarily rely on future Governments choosing to underwrite police force liabilities or investing additional moneys in rebuilding areas hit by riots.
Riot Compensation Bill — House of Commons, 2015-12-04
Topic: Housing
Antoinette Geraldine Sherratt (Sandbach) (Conservative, Centre-right): Clearly, property values will differ throughout the country, and many members of the public do not read the fine print in insurance documentation. What is to stop insurance companies excluding riot from their cover? If that does happen, what will happen to those who suffer losses greater than the ones mentioned in my hon. Friend’s Bill?
Riot Compensation Bill — House of Commons, 2015-12-04
Topic: Housing
Michael Jon Wood (Conservative, Centre-right): Of course we recognise the difference in property values around the country, but we have to accept that basic responsibility for buildings insurance, and indeed contents insurance, needs to be with private insurers. I would certainly hope that we can work together with the insurance industry to make sure that there is a fair response so that the premiums that most people believe they are paying to cover them for damage, however it is caused, really do cover them These new provisions are not just about saving money; they are also about improving and modernising the claims process. The short timescales in the old Act for submitting and evidencing a claim were not feasible for many potential claimants. The original 14-day period was extended to 42 days under the Government’s emergency amendment for the 2011 riots. Those riots demonstrated that the period was not long enough in certain cases. Many homes and places of business were inaccessible because they were designated crime scenes. In a number of claims, full details could not be provided because of a dependency on external processes as seemingly unrelated as planning permission The Bill will allow regulations to be made to extend those periods. Initially, a claimant need only lodge notice of a claim 42 days after the incident. By lodging notice of a claim, they will then have another 90 days to gather the evidence to substantiate the quantity and nature of the losses. That means that riot victims can focus on their most immediate needs in the shortest term and worry about paperwork further down the line when they are in a better position to deal with it Regulations to the Bill will change the way that compensation is calculated from the old-for-old replacement payments system, based on the current value of property, as depreciated, to a new-for-old system to allow people in the majority of circumstances to replace their property in full. That will considerably ease the decision-making process.