argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Work: People with Disabilities — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Lucy Maria Powell (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, but I am afraid that I am not smiling about the Minister’s replies, because they are so far detached from the reality that many of us are seeing on the frontline. She will know that those facing a change in circumstance are not protected by the transitional protections. This is affecting dozens of disabled constituents of mine, such as Dean, who has lost £300 a month, having lost his disabled premium going from tax credits to universal credit, and Erica, who has now built up £5,000 of overpayments due to the same thing. The principles of universal credit are now in tatters—it is not helping people to work. When will the Government review this?
Pensions Dashboard — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Labor
John Eugene Joseph Dromey (Labour, Centre-left): It is nothing short of astonishing that the Secretary of State sought to pull the plug on the groundbreaking cross-party pensions dashboard, designed to help workers know what they have saved and what they have to save to ensure a decent income in retirement, and all easily accessible in one place. Will the Minister now ensure an obligation on providers to supply the necessary information to the pensions dashboard, and can we be confident that the Secretary of State, whose capacity to get it wrong knows no bounds, will not make a renewed attempt to thwart the pensions dashboard?
Universal Credit Roll-out — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Caroline Louise Flint (Labour, Centre-left): As universal credit is rolled out, the Government have announced that they are removing local authority funding support for claimants and placing the role solely with Citizens Advice. When will Doncaster Citizens Advice, and all the other branches in the country, know for sure exactly what resources they will receive, and when?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Marsha Chantol De Cordova (Labour, Centre-left): Under universal credit, severely disabled people will lose out on disability premiums worth up to £80 per week, and will also lose the £30 "limited capability for work" component. Last week, the Secretary of State said that 1 million disabled people would be "significantly better off" under universal credit. Let me ask her now whether that is really the case. Is not the reality that after the premiums and the £30 component have been scrapped, disabled people will in fact be worse off overall under universal credit?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: The roll-out of universal credit will come to Willenhall in my constituency on Wednesday. Will the Minister join me in endorsing the work of Walsall Housing Group and its Rent First programme, which is helping tenants to prepare for that transition?; Shortly after the 2015 general election, the then Chancellor removed £3 billion per annum from universal credit. That would never have been allowed to happen had the Liberals still been in government. Members of all parties in the House have urged the Secretary of State to urge the Chancellor to replace the £3 billion work allowance so that work really does pay; will she do so?; I welcome the announcement that Citizens Advice will be providing universal support in Dudley South and across the country. Can the Minister explain how this will benefit my constituents, and particularly their timely access to universal credit?; We have heard a lot of warm words from the Secretary of State and Members on the Government Benches about universal credit, but I was recently approached by a constituent who has had to give up a well-paid job because of severe anxiety and depression and who, after the wait for universal credit, is going to be £400 a month worse off, so will the Secretary of State disown the Prime Minister’s assertion that austerity is over, because it certainly isn’t for people on universal credit?; I welcome the announcement that the Department is providing work experience, and working with Barnardo’s to provide work experience, for care leavers. What further support is my hon. Friend offering to care leavers to ensure they fulfil their potential?; I had a constituent with severe learning impairment who, being unable to read the letters she received about the transition to PIP, had her DLA payments suspended. How can the Secretary of State justify a managed migration for disabled people when the Government cannot even get the basics right of communicating with people?; Ministers defend the five-week wait for universal credit on the basis that employees will have had a month’s pay in their bank account when they left their previous job. Does the Minister accept that that case simply does not apply to employees paid weekly or those on zero-hours contracts?
Liam Dominic Byrne (Labour, Centre-left): Birmingham’s food banks have had their busiest year ever—70% of their demand is due to universal credit. Can I give the Secretary of State a choice? Either pause this crazy roll-out or come to Birmingham and help us to raise the tonne and a half of food we need each month to replenish the empty food bank stock.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: The roll-out of universal credit will come to Willenhall in my constituency on Wednesday. Will the Minister join me in endorsing the work of Walsall Housing Group and its Rent First programme, which is helping tenants to prepare for that transition?; Shortly after the 2015 general election, the then Chancellor removed £3 billion per annum from universal credit. That would never have been allowed to happen had the Liberals still been in government. Members of all parties in the House have urged the Secretary of State to urge the Chancellor to replace the £3 billion work allowance so that work really does pay; will she do so?; I welcome the announcement that Citizens Advice will be providing universal support in Dudley South and across the country. Can the Minister explain how this will benefit my constituents, and particularly their timely access to universal credit?; We have heard a lot of warm words from the Secretary of State and Members on the Government Benches about universal credit, but I was recently approached by a constituent who has had to give up a well-paid job because of severe anxiety and depression and who, after the wait for universal credit, is going to be £400 a month worse off, so will the Secretary of State disown the Prime Minister’s assertion that austerity is over, because it certainly isn’t for people on universal credit?; I welcome the announcement that the Department is providing work experience, and working with Barnardo’s to provide work experience, for care leavers. What further support is my hon. Friend offering to care leavers to ensure they fulfil their potential?; I had a constituent with severe learning impairment who, being unable to read the letters she received about the transition to PIP, had her DLA payments suspended. How can the Secretary of State justify a managed migration for disabled people when the Government cannot even get the basics right of communicating with people?; Ministers defend the five-week wait for universal credit on the basis that employees will have had a month’s pay in their bank account when they left their previous job. Does the Minister accept that that case simply does not apply to employees paid weekly or those on zero-hours contracts?
Christopher Philip James Elmore (Labour, Centre-left): One of the concerns being expressed by constituents about the universal credit roll-out is literacy levels and people’s unwillingness and fear about being able to complete forms. Given that universal credit is to be fully rolled out in my constituency in December, what assurance can the Minister give me that those with poor literacy levels with receive the support they need to get the benefits that they need and deserve?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Prime Minister for an advance copy of her statement. This really is beginning to feel like groundhog day—another "nothing has changed" moment from this shambles of a Government. Almost two and a half years after the referendum, 18 months since the triggering of article 50 and with less than six months to go, what do we have to show for all that? Yesterday we saw another Brexit Minister shuttling over to Brussels only to come back, tail between his legs, unable to deliver because of divisions in the Conservative party. Over—[Interruption.]
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): Over the past 18 months, red line after red line has been surrendered. Even the Prime Minister’s much-vaunted Chequers plan now appears to be dead in the water. In fact, after countless resignations and the threat of even more, she could not even bring herself to mention Chequers in her own conference speech. The Prime Minister must stop the excuses. There is a Brexit deal that could command the support of Parliament and the country—a Brexit deal that would benefit Britain and allow us to rebuild our communities, regions and economy, and avoid any hard border in Northern Ireland—but that is not her deal As we reach a critical point in this nation’s history, we need a Prime Minister who will for once make the right decision, put the country before her party and stand up to the reckless voices on her Back Benches and within her Cabinet. For too long this country has been held hostage to those in her party who want to drive through a "race to the bottom" Brexit deal that lowers rights and standards, and sells off our national assets to the lowest bidder. It is clear—[Interruption.]
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): It is clear that the Prime Minister’s failure to stand up to the warring factions on her own side has led us to this impasse. Let me remind the Prime Minister and Conservative Members what they signed up to just 10 months ago: "In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement." Does that still stand? That is an interesting question for the Prime Minister The Prime Minister is now hoping that she can cobble together a deal that avoids all the big questions as to what our future partnership with the European Union will be. Is it not the case that the backstop is necessary only because the Government will not agree to a new comprehensive customs union with the EU, with a say for Britain in future trade deals? How long is her envisaged temporary deal? One year? Two years? Five years? More? Britain deserves a bit better than this. The blindfold Brexit that the Government are cooking up is a bridge to nowhere and a dangerous leap in the dark Let me be clear that the only thing we can trust this Government to do is to impose more years of austerity on the people of this country. The Prime Minister wants to present Brexit as a choice between her deal and no deal. This is simply not the case. There is an alternative option—an alternative that can command the support of Parliament and the country. Labour has set out our six tests. Indeed, at times the Prime Minister has said that she will meet them. Labour’s plan—[Interruption.]
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): Labour’s plan is for Britain and the EU to negotiate a permanent customs union to protect jobs and manufacturing. We want a deal that allows us to strengthen rights and working standards so that we can avoid a race to the bottom, and we want a deal for all regions and nations that allows us to invest in local infrastructure, local transport and energy markets so that we can grow our economy again. Labour will not give the Government a blank cheque to go down the reckless path they are set on at present Let me be clear that the choice for this Parliament should never be the Prime Minister’s deal or no deal. If this Government cannot get a good deal for this country, they have to make way for those who can. The Prime Minister faces a simple and inescapable choice: be buffeted this way and that way by the chaos of her own party, or back a deal that can win the support of Parliament and the people of this country.
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): In the paper that was published on 7 June, proposing a way to keep an open border in Northern Ireland, the Government said that their temporary customs arrangement would be in place "until the future customs arrangement can be introduced" The Prime Minister has just reminded the House that she expects those arrangements to be in place by December 2021 at the latest—which, incidentally, is a whole year after the end of the proposed transition period—but since the expectation of an end date is not the same as a definite end date, when is she going to tell her party that we cannot have a fixed artificial time limit on the fall-back that the Government are trying to negotiate with the EU?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister will know that there is a real fear that the Government will delay pinning down any deal until the last possible minute so that they can try to bounce Parliament with the threat that it is her deal or no deal. She knows that that would be unacceptable to Parliament, but she also knows how damaging no deal would be in terms of security as well as jobs and the economy. So will she confirm that it would be better to apply for an extension to article 50 than to crash out with no deal?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Elizabeth Louise Kendall (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Prime Minister stand by the commitment made by the Brexit Secretary to this House last week that the Government will publish a specific end date to the Irish backstop as part of the withdrawal agreement?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Benjamin Peter James Bradshaw (Labour, Centre-left): It must be obvious to the Prime Minister that there is no majority in this place for a hard or no-deal Brexit, and she cannot do the sensible thing on the customs union and the single market because half her party and the DUP will not let her, so is she never tempted by the suggestion of her right hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry) that the way out of this mess—for her and for the country—will be a people’s vote?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Is not the Prime Minister’s problem that she is dancing to the tune of the hard Brexiteers—the duo from Uxbridge and Somerset—and we should not therefore be surprised that she is taking the country towards an inferior, low-grade, hard-Brexit FTA deal? Will she give an undertaking that, when this House—when Members of Parliament—look at that deal and decide that, actually, it is not right for the country and we decide a different course, she will respect the decision of Members of Parliament to put this question to a people’s vote?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister has chastised Labour’s six tests. Let us look at the one she set, which is that frictionless trade must be the condition for signing up to the withdrawal agreement. Two and a half years on, all the whizz-bang technology you like and a temporary customs arrangement later shows that only staying in the customs union can do that. So in meeting her own test, the Prime Minister will face the same challenge she faces now: is it friction with the European Research Group or the future of the people of Northern Ireland that matters more? Her refusal to let the British public sort this out through a final-say deal shows that it is not the country.
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Emma Elizabeth Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister has clearly ruled out a Canadian-style free trade agreement. As she rightly says, such an agreement would not lead to frictionless trade, and indeed would be disastrous for our food, automotive and aerospace industries, among others. However, will she explain how she will guarantee jobs in these industries and deliver frictionless trade if the UK leaves the customs union, and will these customs arrangements be detailed in the political declaration that we will have to vote on?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Michael John Gapes (Labour, Centre-left): The Good Friday agreement took months of intensive negotiation and was then agreed in simultaneous referendums by overwhelming majorities in both Northern Ireland and the Republic. The position as regards the 2016 referendum was that it was a narrow majority on an advisory referendum. Which does the Prime Minister think is more important?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister keeps advising hon. Members that if they want to know how to keep frictionless trade, they should just read the White Paper, but surely the Salzburg summit taught her that the White Paper was completely and utterly dead in the water. What is her plan B?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): Some people in the House who have been supporting the Government seem to think that the solution is to have a hard border in Northern Ireland but not to enforce it. Is not that prospect just a myth?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Wesley Paul William Streeting (Labour, Centre-left): Of course there has been a people’s vote since the referendum—the general election—when the public sent the Prime Minister the clear message that there was no majority in the country for a hard Brexit. Given that, and given that she was told very clearly that there was no majority in the House for Chequers and the White Paper, why does she expect Labour MPs to ride to her rescue and vote for a hard Brexit that would cost people’s jobs in our constituencies and the country at large?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Catherine McKinnell (Labour, Centre-left): It has been suggested that the Brexit Secretary has promised the Prime Minister that he will deliver Chequers while at the same time assuring the ERG that he will stop it. Will she confirm that this cannot possibly be the case and that she has full confidence in her Secretary of State?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Peter John Kyle (Labour, Centre-left): During the referendum and since, the people running Britain’s businesses have been promised repeatedly that they will enjoy the exact same benefits that they currently enjoy once we have left the EU. After two years of negotiation, it is patently clear that they will not. Does the Prime Minister empathise with them? Does she understand why they want to have a say on the deal themselves, and to decide for themselves whether it is fit for British business?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Albert Owen (Labour, Centre-left): The Republic of Ireland is the main trading link with the United Kingdom, through the port of Holyhead in my constituency. I have been raising this issue with the Prime Minister for the last 18 months. Businesses are worried because contingency plans have been undertaken by Irish companies to go directly to the European continent. What assurances can the Prime Minister give to businesses in my community that that will not happen?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jonathan Neil Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): There are many of us who genuinely accept the referendum result and want the Prime Minister to agree a good deal, but we are also realists and accept that there will be trade-offs in the different deals and options. The problem with the Prime Minister repeating today her belief that we will somehow agree the Chequers proposals is surely that the EU has clearly said it will never agree to them, that the Conservative party has said it would never vote for them, if they were agreed, and, crucially, that Chequers does not resolve the big issue of substance: the question of whether the ability to unilaterally agree free trade deals is really worth the loss to the UK of frictionless supply chains in manufacturing and of market access for financial services and, even more importantly, the risk to future stability and peace in Northern Ireland.
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): In 2015, David Cameron was elected on a promise of a referendum on the EU, but promised to stay in the single market. Given that the current Prime Minister has decided to break that latter promise, and given the other promises broken since 2016—not least, those written on red buses—does she not agree that this mandate about the single market and the customs union fundamentally undermines the integrity of Britain and Northern Ireland? Should the situation not ultimately be resolved not by a simple choice between a bad deal and no deal, but with the option of remaining in the EU through a people’s vote so that the people can look again?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Matthew Toby Perkins (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister appears to be heading towards a deal that enjoys the support of almost nobody. She is saying to the Brextremists that they need to vote for her deal otherwise Brexit will collapse, and she is saying to more moderate voices that they need to back her deal otherwise there will be no deal. Is it not the truth that neither of those positions is actually true?
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Rupa Asha Huq (Labour, Centre-left): The Brexit Minister luckily made it back okay from the continent yesterday, but my son’s school trip letter about Berlin in June warns that in the case of a no-deal Brexit the projected price may rise due to the pound sterling rate relative to the euro and that additional fees may be incurred for visas—not to mention what will happen to the plane if the open skies agreement is not renewed. If Elthorne Park High School is not prepared to take the whole "It’ll be all right on the night" line that we be keep being fed, surely "Project Fear" is fast becoming "Project Reality".
EU Exit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2018-10-15
Topic: International Affairs
Anna Rhiannon McMorrin (Labour, Centre-left): Despite her protestations, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Prime Minister is unable to hold her party together, let alone the country. There is no doubt about it: my constituents did not vote to become poorer, which is what will happen if she proceeds along this route. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and give the people a final say on the deal?