argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Toilet Facilities: People with Disabilities — House of Commons, 2017-01-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jonathan Neil Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful for the hon. Lady’s comments and to the many colleagues who have stayed for this debate. It is extremely pleasing to hear that such schemes are already in existence in some parts of the country. Just as many shops and cafes now have "Breastfeeding welcome" signs in their windows, I would like to see as many businesses as possible displaying signs saying: "Accessible toilet here, all welcome". I understand that some boroughs, such as Lambeth, have already gone further than a voluntarily scheme and managed their community toilet scheme in such a way as to commit that no one has to walk more than 500 metres to find a toilet. The locations of the nearest community toilet provided by local businesses are then well signposted. I know that for some disabled users the maximum distance of 500 metres would still be too far to go, but this sort of public commitment and planning feels like a good start A lot more could be done with technology. Apps are already springing up to enable smartphone and tablet users quickly to find their nearest accessible toilet. I had a look at one such app, however, and looking at an area I knew well, I could point to toilet locations not listed. I would therefore echo the comments of the hon. Member for Chippenham (Michelle Donelan): as well as extending community toilet schemes, we must extend the amount of information in the public domain, especially online, so that people can find help at the touch of a button when they need it The way that Brian Dean was repeatedly turned away from businesses highlighted not only a lack of compassion but an absence of sound business sense, as the hon. Member for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow (Dr Cameron) said. It strikes me that there is a clear business case for more traders opening their doors to those who need to use their toilets. In my constituency, as elsewhere, town centre economies have struggled as custom has been lost to out-of-town shopping outlets and internet shopping. The biggest out-of-town retailer in my area, the famous intu Trafford Centre, is a former winner of the "Loo of The Year" awards—something I was not aware of until recently. I have had constituents with disabilities tell me that it is often easier to travel the 20 miles—no small distance—to the Trafford Centre to shop, rather than the half mile to the town centre, because the access and toilet facilities are far superior in meeting their needs. If we are going to stop the drain in footfall from our town centres and seek to revive those small business-led economies, we must address accessible toilet provision. The Trafford Centre is also one of Greater Manchester’s relatively few locations with a Changing Places toilet. This is a scheme that has already been mentioned. Changing Places is a campaign to provide toilet facilities for people whose disabilities are such that they cannot use a regular accessible toilet.
Toilet Facilities: People with Disabilities — House of Commons, 2017-01-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jonathan Neil Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): I absolutely agree. This is a fantastic scheme, but as the hon. Lady says, in those 10 years we have secured fewer than 1,000—just 914—registered Changing Places toilets in the UK. I echo the calls of campaigners to make this 1,000 before the end of this year.
Toilet Facilities: People with Disabilities — House of Commons, 2017-01-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robert Howard Marris (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Minister for his support. Would he consider commissioning, through his Department, the development of a mobile phone app with access to a master list of all sorts of accessible toilets in the United Kingdom, whether they are Changing Places toilets or toilets that meet other requirements that people have, so that they can find them easily?
Hate Crime: Non-UK EU Citizens — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What assessment he has made of potential trends in the level of prosecutions for hate crime towards non-UK EU citizens once article 50 is triggered.
Gerald Jones (Labour, Centre-left): What steps is the CPS taking to improve the conviction rate for hate crimes against disabled people? Does he support the call by the shadow Solicitor General, my hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds), for parity in the treatment of all protected characteristics in the aggregated offences regime?
Statutory Sex and Relationships Education — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Sarah Deborah Champion (Labour, Centre-left): More than half of lesbian, gay and bi pupils have experienced direct bullying, and LGBT people are twice as likely as heterosexuals to have suicidal thoughts or to have attempted suicide. The Minister will be aware that people are committing terrible homophobic and hate crimes online—crimes for which they would be held accountable offline. The "#no2LGBTHate" campaign is calling on Twitter to take action against users who spread homophobia on the site. Does the Minister support the campaign? What is she doing to tackle homophobic hate?
Racially Motivated Incidents — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Gerald Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for that answer. Across the UK we saw a rise in hate crime and religiously aggravated offences following the referendum—it was 41% higher in July 2016 than in July 2015. Will he inform the House of what provisions have been put in place to avoid any repetition specifically in relation to the triggering of article 50?
State Pensions: Working-Class Women — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on the effect of recent changes to state pensions on the income of working-class women in retirement.
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): Working-class women are more likely to be in manual trades, which take a greater toll on the body as it ages, and to die younger due to the health inequalities from which we still suffer. The Minister did not mention the word "class" in her reply. Will she say right now that she will ensure justice for working-class women and all WASPI women by giving them a fair deal in the spring Budget?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: Does the Minister agree that the Equality and Human Rights Commission must publish an equalities impact assessment of its planned redundancy programme before that programme proceeds any further?; Research by England Athletics shows that more than a third of women have suffered harassment while out running. I chair the all-party parliamentary group for running. What further help can my right hon. Friend offer to challenge that behaviour, which is clearly a barrier to getting more women out running?; Four thousand eight hundred women in my constituency and countless thousands across the United Kingdom are WASPI women, losing out on thousands of pounds that is rightfully theirs. Does the Minister agree that this affects a generation of women who very often suffer from pay discrimination, and that denying them their rightful pension only heaps injustice upon injustice?; The Government have said that setting the age threshold for their living wage at 25 creates a financial incentive to employ young people, but given that the Federation of Small Businesses has advised its members that employing a young person on that basis could constitute age discrimination, will the Government review the age threshold and introduce the living wage from 18 to combat age discrimination in the workplace?
Kelvin Peter Hopkins (Labour, Centre-left): According to a report by the Trades Union Congress, between January and March 2014, following the introduction of tribunal fees, just 1,222 sexual discrimination claims were made to an employment tribunal, compared with 6,017 in the same quarter a year earlier. Does that not make a nonsense of the Government’s supposed concern for gender equality?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: Does the Minister agree that the Equality and Human Rights Commission must publish an equalities impact assessment of its planned redundancy programme before that programme proceeds any further?; Research by England Athletics shows that more than a third of women have suffered harassment while out running. I chair the all-party parliamentary group for running. What further help can my right hon. Friend offer to challenge that behaviour, which is clearly a barrier to getting more women out running?; Four thousand eight hundred women in my constituency and countless thousands across the United Kingdom are WASPI women, losing out on thousands of pounds that is rightfully theirs. Does the Minister agree that this affects a generation of women who very often suffer from pay discrimination, and that denying them their rightful pension only heaps injustice upon injustice?; The Government have said that setting the age threshold for their living wage at 25 creates a financial incentive to employ young people, but given that the Federation of Small Businesses has advised its members that employing a young person on that basis could constitute age discrimination, will the Government review the age threshold and introduce the living wage from 18 to combat age discrimination in the workplace?
Christopher Philip James Elmore (Labour, Centre-left): This week marks the start of LGBT history month, and, of course, we all celebrate the great achievements the LGBT community has given this country. However, hate crime against the LGBT community remains far too high, with Stonewall saying that one in four LGBT people hide their sexual orientation. Will the Minister take urgent action to tackle that, first by increasing the sentences for those who commit hate crimes against LGBT people?
Restoration and Renewal — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Other
Questions: What plans he has for the House to debate and vote on the timetable and budget for the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster; and if he will make a statement.
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): "Taking their time" is the understatement of the year! The Joint Committee was chaired by two Ministers, one of whom, the right hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), is sitting on the Front Bench. He was staring at the back of the head of the Deputy Leader of the House, going, "Just get on with it, man." Get on with it!
Restoration and Renewal — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Other
Questions: What plans he has for the House to debate and vote on the timetable and budget for the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster; and if he will make a statement.
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): First, people started talking about the great reform Bill—where do all these greats come from?—and now there will presumably be the great reconstruction bill for the House of Commons. All the time I have been a Member we have made do and mended, and we have got on perfectly well. Why do we need to have this reconstruction? Let us just patch things up a bit and carry on as normal.
Women and Equalities Committee — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Civil Rights
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister confirm whether he has received any representations from anyone from a BME community about their happiness or otherwise of the title of the Women and Equalities Committee? As a member of the BME community, may I say that I am very happy with the name of the Women and Equalities Committee?
Airport Capacity and Airspace Policy — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christina Elizabeth Rees (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Secretary of State’s airspace policy consultation include new measures to protect the public from the danger of drones? Given the recent reports of airspace near misses, will he act now, before a tragedy occurs?
Exiting the EU: New Partnership — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Immigration
Alison McGovern (Labour, Centre-left): Given the old-age dependency ratio and its importance for the public finances and given the absence of the concrete information in paragraph 5.9 of the White Paper, what level of net migration to our country does the Secretary of State anticipate across future years?
Armed Forces Covenant — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Mixed Topics
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Centre-left): I am making the more general point that the situation varies across the country. I am sure that it is really good in some local education authorities, but it is not so good elsewhere. Perhaps the situation in Aldershot, which is in Hampshire, is particularly good because there are a lot of service personnel, so they have experience. The Government need to consider what happens when service personnel disperse to areas across the country that do not have so many service personnel and how to give them the same quality of provision Finally, the issue of mental health will not go away. Significant numbers of veterans are still struggling to access the services that they need. We can debate why that is, but the reality is that things need to be improved and more needs to be done This is a hugely significant debate—it has almost been a discussion—and we all want the best for our veterans. We talk about their service to the country, and we need to make sure that the country does its best for them.
Armed Forces Covenant — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I am sorry, but I have just done some calculations and, given the number of Members who wish to speak, I am going to have to impose a six-minute limit on speeches after the hon. Member for Motherwell and Wishaw (Marion Fellows) takes her seat. That was a very long intervention, which would normally be fine on a Thursday, but we are going to be very pressed for time today. In the light of that, if the hon. Lady brought her speech to a conclusion, we would be very grateful.
Armed Forces Covenant — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I said that I hoped the hon. Lady was reaching a conclusion. Every minute that she takes is coming off subsequent Members. The speech limit is six minutes now, but it is rapidly coming down unless she really does conclude.
Broadcasting (Radio Multiplex Services) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-01-13
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Rosena Chantelle Allin-Khan (Labour, Centre-left): I have not personally met the providers as I am the shadow Minister for Sport, but my shadow DCMS team have met providers, and I have been briefed. The Opposition team are fully aware of all the details, as I am outlining.
Civil Partnership Act 2004 (Amendment) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-01-13
Topic: Civil Rights
Christina Elizabeth Rees (Labour, Centre-left): I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on bringing forward the Bill. I have supported this proposal for a long time, as it is all about equality. I had a private Member’s Bill, which did not get as far as his, that would have corrected another anomaly in the law by putting mothers’ names and occupations on marriage certificates. The hon. Member for Charnwood (Edward Argar) has taken up the mantle on that. The Bill before us is about equality. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, despite the result of the appeal in the High Court, which is being challenged, it is for this House to decide the matter because it is of great public interest?
Jobcentre Plus Offices: Closure — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Catharine Letitia Hoey (Labour, Centre-left): Two jobcentres in my constituency are being relocated to another jobcentre in my constituency. I need to understand why that decision was taken. We have no evidence or anything on our equality duty. I am very concerned that in Lambeth there is still a problem with gang culture, and young people in particular do not want to move from one area to another. Will the Minister please look at this again and talk to people in Lambeth before the decision is taken?
Jobcentre Plus Offices: Closure — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
John Woodcock (Labour, Centre-left): The industrial injuries team in Barrow has accumulated many years of experience, and that expertise has enabled the team to take the claimant handling time for one of the nation’s most complex benefits down from 175 days to 33 days. That reduction has meant that some of the most vulnerable people in the country, with terminal conditions such as asbestosis, have been able to receive their benefit before they died. Will she listen to the concern that if that expertise is dissipated when a new team comes in, the waiting times will go back up and many people will die before they receive their benefit?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Luciana Clare Goldsmith (Berger) (Labour, Centre-left): On Holocaust Memorial Day on Friday, the Prime Minister told us: "Our commitment to remember the Holocaust is about more than words…It is about…standing up to prejudice…wherever it is found today." Why, then, was the Prime Minister unable on Saturday to adhere to her own call to action?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Why did the Foreign Secretary make no reference at all in his statement to the Americans’ suspension of their refugee programme? Should not our Prime Minister have echoed the words of the Canadian Prime Minister by saying that we welcome those who are fleeing persecution, terror and war, regardless of their faith?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Shabana Mahmood (Labour, Centre-left): This order stigmatises not just on the basis of nationality, as the Secretary of State says it does; it stigmatises on the basis of faith. This is a Muslim ban, and that has been admitted by those the American President asked to help him implement his Muslim ban legally. Why is the Secretary of State persisting in pretending that these people are not doing the very thing that they themselves are telling us they are doing?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jessica Rose Phillips (Labour, Centre-left): I wonder whether the Foreign Secretary could comment on the blog that has just come up from Gary Gibbon at Channel 4, which states that the Prime Minister was "told a US refugee ban was coming" prior to the signing of the Executive order. Can the Foreign Secretary confirm or deny that fact?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Daniel Stephen Zeichner (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips) raised an important point a few moments ago to which the House did not get a full answer. It would appear that the Prime Minister was told in her talks about the refugee ban, so will the Foreign Secretary confirm whether that was the case? If so, what was her advice to the President?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Is it discourteous to the House for the Foreign Secretary to leave during an application for an emergency debate in his area? I appreciate that this did not come up on the screens, but it had been widely telegraphed. Indeed, in case there was any doubt about it, I wrote him a note to tell him it was coming.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Edward Samuel Miliband (Labour, Centre-left): I seek leave to propose that the House should debate a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration: the need for repeal of President Trump’s discriminatory, divisive and counterproductive ban on entry to the United States for people from seven predominantly Muslim countries and the indefinite ban placed on Syrian refugees I am supported in this application by the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Nadhim Zahawi) and a number of other hon. Members. This ban has provoked outrage around the world and in our country, and I believe it to be of sufficient urgency and importance to qualify for immediate debate under the Standing Orders of this House. Notwithstanding the statement we have just had, I believe that it is right, given the gravity of the issue, that this House has a proper debate today on these matters, so that Members from across all parties can express their views The ban is not an attack on terrorism; it is an attack on those of a particular religious faith: Muslims. It is clearly discriminatory, it represents a repudiation of the 1951 UN Geneva convention on refugees and it will not make the world a safer place—it will make it a more dangerous one. From the exchanges earlier, we can see that there is a host of unanswered questions relating to UK residents who have passports from the countries concerned. Given our close, historical alliance with the United States, it is particularly important that this Parliament speaks up—preferably with one voice—to seek to get this ban revoked. An emergency debate would represent an important opportunity to do this; indeed, it is for an eventuality such as this—a matter of pressing and immediate importance—that the Standing Orders were designed. So I ask you, Mr Speaker, to grant this application under Standing Order No. 24 for an emergency debate.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Keith Anthony Vaz (Labour, Centre-left): One of the key aspects is the dramatic effect of the ban on those who had boarded aircraft, ready to go to the United States with valid visas, only to arrive and be told that they had to go back. It is that physical, emotional effect that is the most damning part of what is being proposed.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Edward Samuel Miliband (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon will perhaps say something personal about that, but I say to the hon. Gentleman—this is very important, because President Trump is trying to sow confusion on this issue—that President Obama’s action was about the visa waiver scheme in relation to those countries. It was most emphatically not about a blanket ban on individuals from those countries coming to the US The countries selected for the ban are Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen. There is no question but that those countries, in their different ways, are extremely dangerous places, but does a blanket ban on people from those countries make any sense? In my view, it does not. If we read the Executive order—it is worth reading it, along with the annotations to it—we see that it falls apart at the first hurdle. Section 1 of the order, right up at the front, states the rationale for the President’s proposals. What does it cite? It cites the 9/11 attacks on America—absolutely appalling events that shocked us all—but none of the 9/11 attackers came from the countries on which the ban has been imposed. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others are not on the list, so the very justification offered in the Executive order frankly falls apart Nobody is against the proper vetting of people from those countries—the strongest security checks—but a blanket ban cannot be the answer. I do not think I can do better than to read the words of Chancellor Merkel, who said earlier: "The necessary and decisive fight against terrorism does not justify a general suspicion against people of a certain belief—in this case people of Muslim belief or people from a certain country. That way of thinking is against my interpretation of the basic tenets of international refugee support and co-operation." Chancellor Merkel put it incredibly well. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester East (Keith Vaz) said, we have seen the dreadful results of this blanket ban playing out over the past few days.