argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: Earlier this month a school in the beautiful Israeli town of Sderot was hit by a rocket—one of 800 fired from Gaza this year. What message do the UK Government have for the innocent Israeli civilians living in constant fear of terror, and does the Minister agree that there will be no progress until terror groups stop prioritising the eradication of Israel over peace?; Disturbingly, medics dealing with the aftermath of the 3 June attacks in Khartoum have said that, as well as 100 people dying, about 70 women might have been raped. Many of my constituents who have links with Sudan have suggested not only that the Janjaweed should be internationally proscribed—even, potentially, as a terrorist organisation—but that we should apply sanctions to those responsible. Do the Government hear my constituents’ call?; Last Friday, the Financial Action Task Force extended its deadline for Iran to commit itself to compliance with crucial financial anti-terrorism measures. Did that form part of the Minister’s discussions in Tehran, and does he share my concern about the extensive reports of Iran’s financing of international terrorism?; Will the Foreign Secretary condemn the repeated expressions of Islamophobia from the President of the United States, including the sharing of a tweet by Katie Hopkins which attacked the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, referring to London as “Londonistan”?; Over the weekend, the chief of the general staff of the Ethiopian army, the president of the Amhara region, and several other high-ranking Ethiopian citizens were murdered. Will my right hon. Friend join me in sending condolences to the people of Ethiopia and to its excellent Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed? He is trying to secure reform in that great country, but clearly there are those who are trying to oppose him.; What assessment have the Government made of the impact that the Windrush scandal has had, and the impact that wider “hostile environment” policies are still having, on our relationships with key allies in the Commonwealth and beyond?; This is UK-India Week, and a large contingent from India is visiting the UK for business purposes and to establish closer ties. Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming UK-India Week, and will he give us a message of support for the building of that strong and stable relationship between the UK and India?
Matthew Toby Perkins (Labour, Centre-left): There is considerable potential for trade and for increasing Britain’s soft power in developing our relationship with the Kurdistan region of Iraq. What more can be done to review the Foreign Office security advice on Kurdistan, and can it be viewed differently from the advice relating to wider Iraq?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: Earlier this month a school in the beautiful Israeli town of Sderot was hit by a rocket—one of 800 fired from Gaza this year. What message do the UK Government have for the innocent Israeli civilians living in constant fear of terror, and does the Minister agree that there will be no progress until terror groups stop prioritising the eradication of Israel over peace?; Disturbingly, medics dealing with the aftermath of the 3 June attacks in Khartoum have said that, as well as 100 people dying, about 70 women might have been raped. Many of my constituents who have links with Sudan have suggested not only that the Janjaweed should be internationally proscribed—even, potentially, as a terrorist organisation—but that we should apply sanctions to those responsible. Do the Government hear my constituents’ call?; Last Friday, the Financial Action Task Force extended its deadline for Iran to commit itself to compliance with crucial financial anti-terrorism measures. Did that form part of the Minister’s discussions in Tehran, and does he share my concern about the extensive reports of Iran’s financing of international terrorism?; Will the Foreign Secretary condemn the repeated expressions of Islamophobia from the President of the United States, including the sharing of a tweet by Katie Hopkins which attacked the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, referring to London as “Londonistan”?; Over the weekend, the chief of the general staff of the Ethiopian army, the president of the Amhara region, and several other high-ranking Ethiopian citizens were murdered. Will my right hon. Friend join me in sending condolences to the people of Ethiopia and to its excellent Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed? He is trying to secure reform in that great country, but clearly there are those who are trying to oppose him.; What assessment have the Government made of the impact that the Windrush scandal has had, and the impact that wider “hostile environment” policies are still having, on our relationships with key allies in the Commonwealth and beyond?; This is UK-India Week, and a large contingent from India is visiting the UK for business purposes and to establish closer ties. Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming UK-India Week, and will he give us a message of support for the building of that strong and stable relationship between the UK and India?
Janet Jessica Daby (Labour, Centre-left): I was incredibly moved to meet Richard Ratcliffe last week. A similar question has been asked today, but I do not feel that it was answered as well as it could have been. His wife is enduring an unjust incarceration in Iran, and I would like to know what the Government are doing specifically to provide us with an update on the steps they are taking to bring her home.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): I warmly congratulate the Government and the Secretary of State on introducing this Bill. I think I have married more people than anybody else in this House, in the transitive use of the word. I was always painfully aware that, when two people come together, it may well be that, in the end, they need to part, but the idea that they would have to prove in court all sorts of reasons for why the marriage had fallen apart—relying on the common law understanding of adultery, for instance—is just nonsense and adds to the sense of pain that there could already be within a family.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Charalambos Charalambous (Labour, Centre-left): I very much welcome the proposals in this Bill. Getting rid of the fault-based approach to divorce and the conflict is a good thing, as is ensuring that people do not have to wait for two years. Does the Secretary of State agree with me and with Resolution, the organisation for family lawyers, that we also need to provide earlier advice for cohabitees who believe that common law spousal rights might exist for them? Legal advice on whether such rights exist would be beneficial. Does he agree that including provision for early advice in the Bill would be welcome?
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Richard Burgon (Labour, Centre-left): I welcome the Bill. Labour supports the introduction of a no-fault divorce procedure, which we committed to in our 2017 general election manifesto, and we are pleased that the Government have acted, especially in the light of the troubling case of Owens v. Owens. We will therefore vote to support the Bill if a vote is called at this stage. We will use our time in Committee to amend the Bill, if need be, to ensure that it is the best law possible for those who are already going through a difficult time in their lives. The existing procedure and law managing divorce and the dissolution of civil partnerships is not fit for purpose and is in clear need of updating. A fundamental problem with the existing law, which is set out for divorcing couples in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and for the dissolution of civil partnerships in the Civil Partnership Act 2004, is that it requires people who seek a divorce to prove that the marriage has broken down, either by establishing fault on the part of one partner, or by showing that the couple have lived separate lives for a number of years. In reality, for those who cannot afford to live in two separate households for years in order to prove that their marriage has broken down, the only option currently available is to establish fault on the part of their partner. That is one way in which the current divorce law discriminates against women, particularly those on a low income, by reducing the options available to them to a fault-based divorce Establishing of one of the three faults—adultery, unreasonable behaviour or desertion—can be difficult, and often heightens tensions at an already stressful time. We know the hurt that such heightened tension can all too often cause. There are widespread concerns about the increased risk of domestic violence faced by women who go through this fractious process. Surveys of people who have gone through the divorce procedure show that in excess of one in four people who go through a divorce have cited a fault that is not in fact true, simply because it is their only way to secure a divorce. This is plainly an unacceptable state of affairs, and it is right that the Government are now acting to address it A conflictual process is deeply damaging to children’s life chances. Children will of course be better served by parents who co-operate, and if their parents have a constructive relationship. The law is a real barrier to that.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): There are very often issues with how the family courts go about these custody matters. I get lots of cases like this, as I am sure my hon. Friend does. It is an area that needs to be looked at. Equally, some lawyers—not all—can exacerbate the situation in the way they handle the case. I get lots of complaints about family courts, particularly with regard to who is right and who is wrong, and there is a lot of antagonism. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bury South (Mr Lewis) said, this can be very damaging to children.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Richard Burgon (Labour, Centre-left): That is why we are very supportive of mediation in family cases in general, and why we have made announcements in relation to legal aid and early family law advice. I hear my hon. Friend’s point about the role of solicitors not always being helpful, but there can also be problems when people end up being advocates for themselves The need to apportion blame and ratchet up the acrimony is one of the main reasons that so many of us want to see an end to this fault-based law—not least because of the impact on children. For example, the present divorce ground of unreasonable behaviour requires allegations that are hardly ever challenged and can sometimes be exaggerated by one spouse against the other, which can exacerbate tensions between them. It also makes it more difficult to agree arrangements for children. Indeed, one of the most urgent reasons for these reforms is to alleviate the harm caused to children, including to their mental health, by acrimonious separations. For a child of a divorcing couple, the divorce can be one of the most difficult times in their life. As the Secretary of State has indicated, the introduction of a no-fault procedure should mean that the whole process can be quicker and less stressful for them. At an emotionally traumatic time, such as a divorce or separation, parents want and need support in order to put the best interests of their children first This change to the law has public support and the support of family law experts. Margaret Heathcote— the chair of Resolution, which represents more than 6,000 family law practitioners and is a strong supporter of this change—said: "Every day, our members are helping people through separation, taking a constructive, non-confrontational approach in line with our code of practice. However, because of our outdated divorce laws, they’ve been working with one arm tied behind their backs." In fact, the Secretary of State quoted her himself Professor Liz Trinder, who led the Nuffield Foundation’s 2017 research into divorce law, is also supportive of these reforms, saying that "making people produce a ‘reason’ to obtain their divorce—as they are currently required to do—does not save marriages and instead just creates a meaningless charade that can create conflict, confusion and unfairness." And Christina Blacklaws, president of the Law Society, said: "Making couples attribute fault…can escalate the differences between them in an already charged situation." The recent case of Owens v. Owens highlighted a particularly iniquitous aspect of our existing divorce laws: the possibility for one party to attempt to refuse a divorce by defending it.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Ian Colin Lucas (Labour, Centre-left): I strongly support the thrust of the hon. Gentleman’s argument and I strongly support the Bill. I am very sorry I was not here for the earlier speeches. All the representations I have received from the legal profession support the Bill. I was a practising solicitor, but I did not do matrimonial law. My daughter does and she strongly supports the Bill. I think it is overdue and I will be strongly supporting it today.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Yasmin Qureshi (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my hon. Friend for that helpful intervention. I hope the Lord Chancellor was listening to that and to everything else we are saying on the Opposition Benches More could be done in the Bill to support the most-at-risk people seeking a divorce. The Bill does not remove the bar on petitioning for divorce in the first year of marriage, despite charities and campaigners pointing to the impact this will have on victims of domestic abuse. We know that big life events such as marriage or pregnancy are hotspots for abuse and controlling behaviour to begin or increase. That first year of marriage is for some not a honeymoon period but a nightmare. It is clear that in 2019 we should not be trapping people in potentially dangerous situations because of an outdated law that does not give people the agency to get themselves out. Can the Lord Chancellor explain the rationale for this omission Overall, we welcome the reform, but we urge the Government to put this progressive shift into the context of the wider changes required to our justice system. There is so much more to do to ensure that anyone going through a tough time, such as a divorce or other conflict, has a positive and fair experience while seeking justice. I hope that the Minister, when he responds, will deal with some of the questions we have raised. That said, this is a very welcome Bill, which is why the Opposition support it.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Law and Crime
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): I am very grateful to the Minister, not least because I have only just come into the Chamber I congratulate the Government on introducing this incredibly important Bill. I also pay tribute to Philip Marshall QC, my colleague at the Bar, who has campaigned on the issue of no-fault divorce for many years. Does the Minister agree, however, that we must not only pass this important Bill, but reintroduce legal aid so that couples who are considering divorce can be advised by solicitors at an early stage? That saves a lot of money in the long run, and it is much better for the entire family.
Closure of Heywood Crown Post Office — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Government Operations
Elizabeth Anne McInnes (Labour, Centre-left): I do apologise, Mr Speaker. I was distracted I rise to present this petition on behalf of the residents of Heywood and Middleton. The petition notes the vital services that Crown post offices provide to their communities, particularly in towns such as ours with only one surviving bank branch and where the post office provides vital access to financial services The Post Office proposes to move Heywood post office from its current location and to franchise the service to an as-yet unopened retail unit in a currently vacant shop in the town, leading to the fears that, should the new shop fail, the post office branch will also be lost. This petition, which has received 1,450 signatures, expresses concern that this move will adversely affect jobs, quality of service and accessibility, and will have a negative impact on Heywood town centre The petition states: The petition of residents of Heywood and Middleton, Declares that Crown Post Offices provide a vital service to their communities; further that Post Office Limited propose to close Heywood Post Office and to franchise the service to a local retailer; further that there is concern that this will adversely affect jobs, quality of service, and accessibility, and have a negative impact on Heywood town centre; and further that a local paper petition and online petition on this matter has received signatures The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government and Post Office Limited to keep Heywood Post Office open at its current location And the petitioners remain, etc [P002479]
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): What does the hon. Gentleman think has caused the crisis at this moment, given what he said about other schools where this has not been an issue? I would suggest that it is due to at least two individuals of whom I am aware, who have been whipping this up, creating a myth and creating fear. This issue has never been raised by any of my schools or constituents. I represent a diverse constituency, as he does, yet both the individuals involved in the Birmingham process have recently arrived in Cardiff, and I suddenly began to receive emails referring to the English education system, rather than the Welsh. Does he think that that is a coincidence, and why it has become an issue now, but not in areas in the rest of the country that are equally diverse?
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Roger Duncan Godsiff (Labour, Centre-left): I have already given way on a couple of occasions. [Interruption.] Well, the hon. Member will have plenty of time to make a speech, because this debate could go on until 7 o’clock Understandably, some parents were unhappy with the response and felt that the school had no regard for their concerns.
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Roger Duncan Godsiff (Labour, Centre-left): I have made it clear that I am not giving way The parents therefore had their own meeting and, after asking the brother of one parent who is in the property business and is well educated and articulate, to be the co-ordinator, they began their protests, on which I will touch in a minute. The common theme that links these two schools is that parents at both schools were neither consulted nor involved in how the nine protected characteristics were to be imparted to children. Parents were excluded entirely from the process, although the Equality Act is not an exam subject, for example, like English or mathematics All schools call regular meetings of parents when they want to inform them about important issues. It is part and parcel of school life for regular meetings to take place with parents, but no meetings with parents were held at the two schools.
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Roger Duncan Godsiff (Labour, Centre-left): I will not The question that those who have sought to characterise the disputes at both schools as a clash of cultures should be asking is, what have the headteachers and their staff at 256 primary schools got right with the support of their parents, while in two schools it seems to have gone very wrong? I turn briefly to the protests outside the school in my constituency.
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Tracy Lynn Brabin (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you so much for giving way. I spent a couple of hours with the headteachers of the schools. Does he agree, while he is talking about the demonstrations, that the probable reason why the headteacher did not have a public meeting was that, in those public arenas she has been called a paedophile and worse?
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Roger Duncan Godsiff (Labour, Centre-left): There are 256 primary schools throughout Birmingham, as I said, where meetings take place all the time between parents and teachers. I do not accept the argument that there could not be parents meetings at the other two schools in Birmingham. If the headteacher or any other teachers felt that such a meeting could develop an unpleasant atmosphere, all they had to do was ask the police to be present. They would gladly have been present. Otherwise, they could have asked for local councillors and the MPs to be present, but no such things happened.
Parental Involvement in Teaching: Equality Act — House of Commons, 2019-06-25
Topic: Education
Roger Duncan Godsiff (Labour, Centre-left): I do not have children attending schools in Birmingham. My children are grown up, and I have a grandchild who is not in Birmingham. It is not for me to pass judgment on the concerns of parents.