argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Delegated Legislation — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Social Welfare
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): With the leave of the House, we shall take motions 5 and 6 together Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)), Social Security That the draft Mesothelioma Lump Sum Payments (Conditions and Amounts) (Amendment) Regulations 2018, which were laid before this House on 15 January, be approved That the draft Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers’ Compensation) (Payment of Claims) (Amendment) Regulations 2018, which were laid before this House on 15 January, be approved.—(Amanda Milling.) Question agreed to.
UK Research Centre for Ceramics — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Foreign Trade
Gareth Craig Snell (Labour, Centre-left): I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his reference to the excellent work that the BCC does. In that same vein, will he put it on record this evening that, when we leave the EU, he will be supporting the efforts that Labour Members will be making when the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill comes back to this House to support the amendments coming from the BCC to protect those manufacturing bases from, as he says, cheap, knock-off imports?
Cross-border Economic Opportunities — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Transportation
Jessica Elizabeth Morden (Labour, Centre-left): My constituents who work in Bristol and beyond have to put up with chronically overcrowded rail services as fares increase. Will the Secretary of State talk to UK Government Transport Ministers—rail services are not devolved—to sort this out?
Universal Credit — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on reducing the time taken to make universal credit payments in Wales.; What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on reducing the time taken to make universal credit payments in Wales.
Hugh Lawrence Gaffney (Labour, Centre-left): Och aye the noo The Opposition welcomed the U-turn by the Chancellor, increasing the waiting time for universal credit from six weeks to five weeks, but this does not go far enough. Household claimants in Wales and across the country are still suffering from rising debts, housing arrears and evictions. Will the Minister stand up for universal credit claimants in Wales by asking his Cabinet colleagues to reduce the waiting time further?
Universal Credit — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on reducing the time taken to make universal credit payments in Wales.; What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on reducing the time taken to make universal credit payments in Wales.
Christopher Shaun Ruane (Labour, Centre-left): I too offer my congratulations to the Minister on his elevation to his new position—llongyfarchiadau Waiting times are important to all claimants, but none more so than the terminally ill—those who the DWP expects to live for less than six months. The DWP’s own data shows that personal independence payment claimants who are terminally ill have their claims reassessed at the rate of seven in 100 in the south-east and 17 in 100 in Wales, which is the highest rate in the country. Why is there such a huge variance, and will the Minister join me in requesting a meeting with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to discuss these issues?
Broadband: Rural Areas — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Technology
Albert Owen (Labour, Centre-left): May I genuinely welcome the Anglesey-born Under-Secretary to his place? The last Anglesey-born Tory Minister was Sir Wyn Roberts, so he has very big shoes to fill. The success of the broadband roll-out in Wales is due to the partnership between the European Union, Government here in Westminster and Government in Wales, working with BT. Will the Minister assure us that in 2020 there will not be a cliff edge and that we will have transitional money from Europe, so that we can roll out to 100%?
Cross-border Transport — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Transportation
Michael Lee Amesbury (Labour, Centre-left): If providing funding to remove the tolls from the Severn bridge is good enough for the people of Wales, why not extend such a generous Government offer to the people of Cheshire and Merseyside and do away with the tolls on the Mersey Gateway?
Cross-border Transport — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Transportation
Justin Piers Richard Madders (Labour, Centre-left): My constituents were pleased to see a commitment to fund a business case to improve the Wrexham to Bidston line in the autumn Budget, but we have not actually had any progress since then. We would really like to see some improvements in both efficiency and frequency on that line, so can the Secretary of State update us on what progress has been made with respect to that?
Cross-border Transport — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Transportation
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): The industrial areas around my constituency, which include Airbus in Broughton and Deeside Industrial Park, absolutely depend on the M56 running smoothly. Has the Secretary of State had any conversations with Highways England, or his counterparts in the Transport Department, about when we shall get that motorway unclogged and running smoothly?
Leaving the EU: Welsh Economy — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Foreign Trade
Charalambos Charalambous (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister reassure the House and businesses across Wales by confirming that arrangements will be put in place to ensure that new trade deals negotiated after leaving the European Union do not undermine devolved policies?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: My right hon. Friend will be aware that the country faces significant cyber-threats from other countries and from non-state actors. He will also be aware that we are protected from those by our security and intelligence services, including the men and women at GCHQ in my county of Gloucestershire. When the Government publish the results of the security review, will he confirm that we will continue, as we have since 2010, to invest in those capabilities to keep our country safe?
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker I want to give the right hon. Gentleman a specific example to illustrate what I am talking about. According to the Government’s own figures, the number of 16 and 17-year-olds receiving carer’s allowance for looking after disabled relatives at home has risen by more than 50% over the past four years, so last year, over 2,000 16 and 17-year-olds gave up their youth and often their schooling to care for relatives at home. How can it be fair and how can it be logical to expect them to take on that responsibility because of failures of the state and then to deny them a say on how that very state is run?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Law and Crime
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): Before I was in this place, I held the post of Director of Public Prosecutions. We took leaks from our department or any other civil service department very seriously. I can only assume that an inquiry is in place in relation to this leak, and in the circumstances we should say nothing more about it.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Catherine McKinnell (Labour, Centre-left): I have repeatedly raised concerns that the north-east and other regions will be hard hit by the very obvious risks of Brexit. It seems from the leak that the Government share that view. Does my right hon. and learned Friend share my view that it is completely unacceptable that the Government think it is okay to keep businesses and people in regions such as mine in the dark?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend demonstrates that hon. Members have been trying on behalf of their constituencies and regions to get a proper analysis of the impact of Brexit on the individuals, businesses and communities they represent. That is why it is so important to have that information. It will mean that we can have an informed debate and hold the Government properly to account.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I have taken a number of interventions and will make progress. I will allow interventions later, otherwise I will not get very far Yesterday, standing at the Dispatch Box, I asked the Government to release the documents referred to in the leak. As I have said, the Government said no. The Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Wycombe (Mr Baker), who is in his place, advanced three defences for that position, none of which withstand scrutiny. His first defence—that the analysis is rubbish—was astonishing. He was asked whether he could name a single civil service forecast that was accurate. He glibly replied: "They are always wrong". He may have forgotten that he is now part of the Government, and yesterday transposed himself back to being spokesperson for Vote Leave. Ministers and the Government commissioned those papers, and it is frankly ridiculous to attempt to rubbish them as an excuse for not publishing them.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I will complete this point and then give way There is a serious point. Is it seriously Government policy that impact assessments are so inherently unreliable that it is better to proceed without them? That is the logic of the position described yesterday. Is it not better to adopt the approach tweeted last night by the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Bracknell (Dr Lee), who said: "The next phase of Brexit has to be all about the evidence. We can’t just dismiss this and move on. If there is evidence to the contrary, we need to see and consider that too"?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): Before I give way, I will make one further point about the line of defence of rubbishing the analysis. It is deeply discourteous and disrespectful to the civil servants who have worked on those papers and are presumably continuing to work on them, often in difficult circumstances. In my experience, having been a civil servant, and having had civil servants as staff, they do a very good job whether or not they agree with the instructions given to them. To glibly answer that they are always wrong was deeply disrespectful to them. I hope the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker), who will speak for the Government today, will take the opportunity formally to apologise to the civil servants who prepared those papers in good faith, and assure them of the support we all have for the work they are trying to do.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Macroeconomics
Alison McGovern (Labour, Centre-left): My right hon. and learned Friend makes the good point that, yesterday, we saw a pretty grim approach to economic forecasting, which was full of jokes and did not address the seriousness of the situation. Does he agree that an opportunity presents itself? The Conservative Government created the Office for Budget Responsibility—independent forecasters who could do the job of providing the public with the facts if only the Government would tell them what their policy is.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Government Operations
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I do agree, and that is a very important point. Essentially, the OBR is saying that it cannot do its job because it does not have the information to do it. That is why it is far better to proceed on the basis of assessments of risk and impact, and to allow the OBR to do its job.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Government Operations
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I will give way in one minute, but may I just finish this point Having been a civil servant for five years and having engaged in risk assessments, I can say that the purpose of the exercise is to identify the risk, the size of the risk, and the likelihood of the risk. The fourth column, which is always the really important one, is what the Government will do to mitigate the risk. That is why these risk assessments are so important.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful for that intervention. I will answer it, and make a second point as I do so. This is a really important point. The second line of defence that was deployed yesterday for not releasing these documents was that they are not complete, they are at an early stage, and they are just evolving. As I recall it, that was exactly what was said about the first set of documents that we were trying to have released last year. We have heard that one before. I have not yet ascertained the status of the documents, but, as I understand it, they were being shown to key Ministers ahead of an important Cabinet Brexit Sub-Committee meeting next week. No doubt, the Minister will be able to confirm that. If those documents are in such a form that they can be shown to Ministers to brief them for an important meeting next week, they are certainly way past the stage of an early script that has not been approved.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Government Operations
Albert Owen (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Member for Arfon (Hywel Williams) makes an important point on where the devolved Administrations have already done their work on the assessments. Therefore, is it what the Minister said yesterday at the Dispatch Box that the Government will not assist them with that work, because many of these areas are partly devolved and partly retained?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Macroeconomics
Emma Elizabeth Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that if the Government had at their disposal any economic evidence or forecast that backed up their chosen approach, it would already be in the public domain; it would not be called a leak?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful for that intervention, and I agree that it would be highly likely that such material would be put into the public domain I come back to this serious point: the choice now to be made is how we leave the EU and what the future relationship might be. That is a profoundly important question. There are many different choices, and we absolutely need—and there should be—a robust impact assessment that we can all see and all discuss.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I will press on, but I will give way again in a minute As I have said, only question was asked on 23 June 2016, which was whether we should leave the EU—not how and not what the future relationship should be. These are incredibly important questions. We need an informed debate, including on the likely economic impact of different approaches. Publication is needed in the name of transparency; publication is needed in the name of scrutiny. There has been an indication that the Government will accept this motion, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister. When he does so, may I caution him, because his fellow Minister, the hon. Member for Wycombe, yesterday found himself saying, at the beginning of his answer that "this economic analysis is not what is formally known as an impact assessment."—[Official Report, 30 January 2018; Vol. 635, c. 680.] Let us not go there again—where a motion is accepted only for later there to be a quibble as to whether the precise wording was sufficient to release the documents. If the motion is being accepted, it needs to be accepted in spirit, in form and in full. Secondly, let there be no confusion about editing or redacting. That is not provided for in this motion, just as it was not provided for last time Finally I ask the Minister, if the motion is to be accepted, when do the Government intend to release the documents? I remind the Minister that when this question arose at the end of our first Humble Address, Mr Speaker was asked what he considered to be a reasonable timeframe for the Government to respond. On that occasion, Mr Speaker said: "One can take a view about this, one can consult "Erskine May" and one should reflect in a sober and considered fashion, but if the hon. Lady is asking me whether I envisage this being something that needs to be deliberated on over a period of several days, the answer is no."—[Official Report, 1 November 2017; Vol. 630, c. 932.] The Opposition anticipate and expect the same sort of timeframe to be kept to in this case.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Thangam Elizabeth Rachel Debbonaire (Labour, Centre-left): I am so grateful to the Minister for being very patient and giving way to me, but I must press him on this point. It is curious to think that the Government are at this moment planning their negotiating strategy without having considered adequate impact assessments. I went to the so-called reading room in December. It was laughable that I had to sign a piece of paper, a copy of which I was not allowed to remove, in order to promise that I would not reveal what was in the documents. If there is going to be another reading room, I will do exactly what I did last time and reveal what is not in them, which is quite a lot. When will the Government work out that they need these impact assessments to have a decent negotiating strategy?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Foreign Trade
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. Lady is giving a passionate speech. The one thing that the Prime Minister has said she wants is to keep frictionless trade in Northern Ireland. The problem is that that is utterly irreconcilable with what she said she does not want, which is the single market and customs union. Therein lies the fundamental confusion that is causing so much difficulty in the country right now.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Macroeconomics
Alison McGovern (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. Lady has hit on the heart of the problem, which is that the Government will not say what they want. However, turning to this issue, does she agree that the reason why the public are in the dark is that we have excellent independent economic forecasters in the Office for Budget Responsibility who say that they simply cannot do their job because we are all in the dark about what the Government actually want? Ought they not to rectify that?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Macroeconomics
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): I have huge respect for the right hon. Lady on this issue. Does she agree that we would not be hearing any of this stuff about the reports being negotiation-sensitive if the Government could lay their hands on a single report that said there would be economic benefits to Brexit, rather than economic costs?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Government Operations
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): My right hon. Friend just pointed to the extraordinary circumstance whereby we see Ministers against civil servants, and I have never seen that situation in my lifetime. Does he not agree that at the heart of this is honesty and transparency for Parliament and the public in the most important debate that we will have for generations?
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Government Operations
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): I agree absolutely. Indeed, I made the point yesterday about the importance of transparency and about a lack of transparency not being in the national interest. I gently say to Ministers that trying to have a go at people who are asking questions about what analysis has been done and what it shows, and attempting to suggest that all of them are trying to undo the referendum result, is an unwise approach. I think it reveals a great defensiveness and a lack of confidence on the part of Ministers about the position that they have put the Government in.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): Indeed, that is the case. Ministers have made those arguments and, of course, when the growth is better than that in any other countries, they would. However, what the analysis appears to show cannot be avoided: in all the options that it looked at, the country would be less well off than we would otherwise be. We are told that the analysis is preliminary. Nineteen months after the referendum, how on earth can it still be preliminary—really? We are told that the people who are meant to be in charge had not seen it until two nights ago, when it is about to be shown in a locked room to members of the Cabinet. We are told, as has been said, that it does not include modelling of the Government’s preferred option. Why on earth not? The answer is a simple one: the Government do not know what their preferred option consists of. Therefore, they cannot model it Apart from anything else, the Government said that they really hoped with the Florence speech last October to get the European Council to move on to phase 2 of the negotiations, but we clearly were not ready then, because we now know that they had not done the modelling, and we are still not ready now, in view of what we have been told. As any teacher would understand, there are only so many times that the family dog’s eating habits can be offered as an excuse for not producing homework Being told graciously, as we all were yesterday, "We will give it to you eventually, when the deal has been done," was not on. I very much welcome—I say this to the Minister in all sincerity—the fact that overnight Ministers have had a rethink and will accept the resolution. I say on behalf of the Exiting the European Union Committee—because we are buying some more lever arch files—that we will handle the material when it is given to us in the same, I hope, professional way that we handled the last lot of information, in line with the commitments I gave to the Secretary of State This shambles—I use the word deliberately—is a symptom of a fundamental problem that the country faces. First, the Government took decisions early on, such as leaving the customs union, leaving the single market, having nothing to do with the European Court of Justice and no free movement, without having made any assessment of what impact that would have on the British economy—none. The decisions were taken for ideological reasons, without looking at any evidence.
Government’s EU Exit Analysis — House of Commons, 2018-01-31
Topic: Macroeconomics
Alison McGovern (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Father of the House agree that the extraordinary actions taken by the Governor of the Bank of England in response to the vote are very poorly understood, which creates an even worse impression of the forecasts made beforehand?