argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
National Debt — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Stephen Paul Barclay (Conservative, Centre-right): As the right hon. Gentleman will have heard from my earlier reply, that bank is in a very different place from where it was in 2008 when the shares were purchased. That reflects the action that has been taken to simplify the balance sheet and to make the bank safer and more streamlined.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Questions: Small businesses in my constituency suffer from late payments from their larger clients. Some firms have been forced to accept discounts of up to 10% just to get paid within 90 days. The Government have introduced welcome measures to make large firms behave more transparently on payments, but does the Chancellor stand ready to take further action to stop big firms using small businesses as a source of cheap loans?
Andrew Hanson Jones (Conservative, Centre-right): We know that late payments are a serious issue for many small businesses, and that is why we are acting to tackle unfair practices. As my hon. Friend mentioned, we have legislated to improve transparency, requiring large businesses to report on their payment practices. All 32 of the Government’s strategic suppliers have signed the prompt payment code, and we have appointed Paul Uppal as the UK’s first small business commissioner to support small businesses in resolving disputes with larger firms.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: Small businesses in my constituency suffer from late payments from their larger clients. Some firms have been forced to accept discounts of up to 10% just to get paid within 90 days. The Government have introduced welcome measures to make large firms behave more transparently on payments, but does the Chancellor stand ready to take further action to stop big firms using small businesses as a source of cheap loans?; Businesses in Newark welcome rising public investment in research and development, but even more they welcome the chance to do it themselves with lower business taxes under this Government. What will the Chancellor do to encourage more businesses to take up the increased research and development tax credits and the patent box delivered in the Budget?
Melvyn John Stride (Conservative, Centre-right): The Government recognise the vital importance of R and D, driving up investment in business and improving our productivity, which is why R and D investment as a proportion of GDP is on the rise, and we will push further towards our target of 2.4%. In the Budget we announced an increase in R and D expenditure tax credits from 11% to 12%.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: Small businesses in my constituency suffer from late payments from their larger clients. Some firms have been forced to accept discounts of up to 10% just to get paid within 90 days. The Government have introduced welcome measures to make large firms behave more transparently on payments, but does the Chancellor stand ready to take further action to stop big firms using small businesses as a source of cheap loans?; Businesses in Newark welcome rising public investment in research and development, but even more they welcome the chance to do it themselves with lower business taxes under this Government. What will the Chancellor do to encourage more businesses to take up the increased research and development tax credits and the patent box delivered in the Budget?; I congratulate the Chancellor on freezing the duty on wine and spirits and ensuring that future changes come into effect only after Christmas, but will he now look at the anomaly whereby excellent English sparkling wine, at 11% strength, is taxed at £2.77 a bottle, compared with just £2.16 for higher strength still wine and just 2p a bottle in France? Post Brexit, will he give a boost to this growing, quality British product?
Andrew Hanson Jones (Conservative, Centre-right): We support the English wine industry, and that is why the autumn Budget announced a freeze on wine duty. Under EU law, duty on higher strength sparkling wine must be the same as that on higher strength sparkling cider, and if we reduced the duty on higher strength sparkling wine, it would mean reducing the duty on a category of alcohol that is effectively associated with problem drinking. I recognise how much of a champion my hon. Friend is of English wine, and he is right to highlight the fact that there are opportunities ahead.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: Small businesses in my constituency suffer from late payments from their larger clients. Some firms have been forced to accept discounts of up to 10% just to get paid within 90 days. The Government have introduced welcome measures to make large firms behave more transparently on payments, but does the Chancellor stand ready to take further action to stop big firms using small businesses as a source of cheap loans?; Businesses in Newark welcome rising public investment in research and development, but even more they welcome the chance to do it themselves with lower business taxes under this Government. What will the Chancellor do to encourage more businesses to take up the increased research and development tax credits and the patent box delivered in the Budget?; I congratulate the Chancellor on freezing the duty on wine and spirits and ensuring that future changes come into effect only after Christmas, but will he now look at the anomaly whereby excellent English sparkling wine, at 11% strength, is taxed at £2.77 a bottle, compared with just £2.16 for higher strength still wine and just 2p a bottle in France? Post Brexit, will he give a boost to this growing, quality British product?; We welcome the scrapping of VAT for Scotland’s police and fire services—and this Government finally seeing sense on this issue—but in an interview this year the Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser said that “there is no justification for a VAT refund”.What does the Chancellor think of that statement? Does he not agree that the £140 million of VAT paid should be reimbursed to our vital emergency services?; Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is thanks to Conservative action that today the richest 1% are paying 27% of all income tax revenue? That is more than at any time under Labour, and it makes that gap between rich and poor the lowest on record.; Will the Chancellor take this opportunity to confirm to the House the statement that the Prime Minister gave to the Manchester Evening News on Sunday evening that the Government will reimburse all the moneys that have fallen on Manchester services as a result of the Arena attack, as well as future costs such as the coroner’s inquest, which is just starting?; The Chancellor will be aware of the need for investment in Devon’s infrastructure, particularly to ensure the resilience of the coastal railway at Dawlish. What reassurance can he give me that funding will be available to carry out the scheme being proposed by Network Rail and to deliver the aspirations of the Peninsula Rail Task Force?; The Scottish Government have committed £250,000 to funding four basic income projects across Scotland. This will enable the Scottish Government to make evidence-based policy. Will the UK Government commit themselves to funding a basic income project?
Alan Mak (Conservative, Centre-right): Manufacturers such as Kenwood in Havant are boosting productivity by adopting new techniques and technologies as the fourth industrial revolution accelerates. Will my right hon. Friend continue to support SME growth through R and D and innovation?
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Before I call Sir Keir Starmer to ask his urgent question, I would emphasise to the House that the purpose of my selecting this urgent question today is to give an opportunity to the Minister to explain to the House what action the Government have taken in response to the order of the House and an opportunity for other Members to question him on those matters. It is not an occasion for the House to debate whether or not a contempt of the House may have occurred. There may or may not be later occasions for that matter to be discussed. This is the correct procedure, and I know the House will trust me to know of what I speak.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): I have great respect for the right hon. Gentleman, and I will certainly communicate his message to the Secretary of State. On the point he makes about the information in the analyses, what the motion referred to was not what existed at the time. What we have tried to do is ensure that there is full information available to his Committee. When he has had the chance to scrutinise that and ask questions of Ministers about that, he will find that information very useful to his scrutiny.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank my right hon. Friend for the point he makes, which is important, but of course we want to ensure that as much information as can be made available to the Select Committee is available within the constraints that I have discussed.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): I take my hon. Friend’s expertise in parliamentary procedure extremely seriously, and I recognise the point that he is making. We do feel that we have responded to the motion in full by preparing for the Select Committee sectoral analyses. The point that I make to him is that the sectoral analyses did not exist in the form that was requested in the motion at the time.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): My right hon. Friend is, as always, forensic in her questioning. We were very clear when we were debating this motion that exactly what it referred to was not available at that time. Of course, there are various assessments and documents held by the Government that have been worked on over time, addressing the individual sectors. We have actually sought to provide the Select Committee with a great deal more information than existed at the time of the Secretary of State’s evidence to it, and I think that that will be valuable to the Committee in its scrutiny.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): I can confirm to the right hon. Gentleman that the information in the edited documents will be valuable to the House, but it is wrong to describe them as "edited documents". I would describe them as comprehensive sectoral analyses that the Government have provided for the Select Committee and will be providing, on a confidential basis, to the House In response to the right hon. Gentleman’s question about the customs union and the single market, I remind him that he, like I, stood on a manifesto that said that we will respect the referendum result and confirmed that the UK will be leaving the customs union and the single market.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jeremy John Elton Lefroy (Conservative, Centre-right): May I gently suggest to my hon. Friend, for whom I have the greatest of respect, that there should be a bit of a rethink on this matter before the Secretary of State appears before the Select Committee in the coming days? I also urge my hon. Friend to recognise that the really important thing at this stage is to get a move on with the negotiations and ensure that companies up and down the country, which are currently in limbo, know what we are going to do. We have to move forward in December; we cannot stand still.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): My right hon. Friend makes an interesting suggestion. I would say that the proceedings of this House—certainly as they are reported by the press—are sometimes of great interest to our continental colleagues, but I do take his point.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Philip Thomas Hollobone (Conservative, Centre-right): It was a mistake not to amend the Opposition’s motion. As a result, the Government are skating on very thin parliamentary ice. The issue could be solved next week if the Government were to come back with a sensible motion, which every Member of this House really ought to support.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): No, I do not believe that is the case at all. We believe that the Select Committee has a serious job of scrutiny to do. These papers have been produced at great length to help to inform that scrutiny.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. The trouble with the interest of the hon. Gentleman, which is of great fascination to Members of the House and many spectators beyond its environs, is that it is not even adjacent to the question before us, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman can entertain himself in the long winter evenings that lie ahead.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): As I made it very clear on the day we debated this issue, the documents did not exist in the form that was requested. We took the motion of the House extremely seriously, and that is why we have made sure that a great deal of information has been provided to the Select Committee.
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Sue-Ellen Cassiana Braverman (Conservative, Centre-right): Does the Minister share my concern about how a letter sent by the Secretary of State to the ExEU Committee managed to reach journalists at the Daily Mirror before it was considered by the Committee? Does that encourage or discourage him when it comes to sharing confidential information?
Leaving the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about the balance we need to strike. We do need to get on with this role, but we also absolutely respect the role of parliamentary scrutiny in this process, which is why the information that has been provided to the Committee is comprehensive and in great detail. It goes beyond the type of summaries that he refers to and, indeed, that the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras suggested might be an answer to this. We have actually provided much more information than just summarising reports could have done.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order on a slightly separate issue, Mr Speaker. Some Government Members, and perhaps some Opposition Members, have asked the Government to come forward with a new motion to try to clarify the distinction between the two differing motions that have come before the House. Is there any technical reason why that motion could not be produced, our having just debated the Humble Address?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman can always discuss these matters, if he wishes, over a cup of tea with the Minister, if the Minister can spare the time to do so. I do not want to get into a detailed examination of all past motions. Suffice it to say—this is important—that there is a very recent motion passed by this House. If I may very politely say so to the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras, I did not say that it was my advice that the motion was binding or effective; as Speaker, I ruled that it was binding or effective. That, I can say to the hon. Member for Glenrothes, irrespective of other motions, remains the fact.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
George Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative, Centre-right): Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I apologise for pressing you for a further clarification, but I do so simply because it may help the House. If a motion of contempt applies in respect of a motion, and a subsequent motion amends the original motion, does that negate any charge of contempt relating to the requirements made previously of the Secretary of State?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I am not sure how grateful I am to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his point of order, but my response is twofold. First, the Address is just that—the Address—whether an attempt was made to amend it or not, and its binding quality is just that. Irrespective of whether that attempt was made or not, it stands anyway. Secondly, how the Government deal with Opposition day debate motions is a matter for the Government. What the Government have done to date is not disorderly. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman has suggested, as I think he has, that at the very least it has not been helpful to the House, I certainly would not dissent from that. It would be helpful if people reflected on the wider implications or ramifications of their conduct on individual occasions. He has served in this House without interruption for 47 years, five months and 10 days, and I think he knows of what he speaks If there are no further points of order, I thank colleagues; that will do for now. We come now to the statement by the Secretary of State for Health, for which he has been most patiently waiting.
Maternity Safety Strategy — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. I have the highest regard for the hon. Lady, who is a considerable medical authority. I gave her a little leeway, but I say very gently that not only did she exceed her time by a minute, but she pursued her usual, rather discursive approach. In these situations, what is required is a question or a series of questions with a question mark or a series of question marks, rather than general analysis. We will leave it there for now. I say that in the most good-natured spirit to the hon. Lady I call Antoinette Sandbach.
Maternity Safety Strategy — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jeremy Richard Streynsham Hunt (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As he knows, because he has spoken so movingly on this subject many times, there is absolutely nothing we can do to make up for the searing loss of losing a loved one—a baby. It is the worst thing any parent can go through. We can at least give them the commitment that we will learn. If we are honest, we do not do so at the moment, because we sometimes wait 10 years for a court case to be settled, and even then it is not always clear to me that the lessons of what happened are properly learned around the system. This statement is an attempt to change that.
Maternity Safety Strategy — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jeremy Richard Streynsham Hunt (Conservative, Centre-right): I absolutely undertake to look into that case and ensure a proper investigation into what is happening. The hon. Gentleman is right; in the end, we need to be much more open about this data, so I commend the trust for sharing the data publicly. Until we access such data, we will not know where the issues are that we need to solve.
Maternity Safety Strategy — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Other
Jeremy Richard Streynsham Hunt (Conservative, Centre-right): I am intrigued to hear that, because my three children were born at the Chelsea and Westminster, and my wife would have been delighted if I had done a "dads to be" course. I will certainly look into that course and, I am sure, actively promote it.
Maternity Safety Strategy — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jeremy Richard Streynsham Hunt (Conservative, Centre-right): I do agree. I have visited my hon. Friend’s trust in Torbay and have been very impressed with the learning I saw from the Sam Morrish case, which was a very sad story of where that did not happen initially. However, as I say, I think the trust has learned all those lessons extremely impressively.
Budget Resolutions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Gregory David Clark (Conservative, Centre-right): I am happy to talk to the hon. Gentleman. He will know that we work closely with the life sciences sector. The industrial strategy published yesterday included an important life sciences sector deal in which all the companies are working closely with each other, local institutions, local leaders and the Government. I am happy in that context to meet him and have those discussions.
Budget Resolutions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Gregory David Clark (Conservative, Centre-right): I will indeed. I am coming on to precisely that point. The hon. Gentleman has a distinguished record of leading Greater Manchester—with some success—in promoting the vitality and attractiveness of that important part of the economy.
Budget Resolutions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Gregory David Clark (Conservative, Centre-right): It certainly is. There are significant opportunities in many of our rural areas, and it is essential that the progress we make in our towns and cities is shared with our rural areas, of which my hon. Friend’s constituency is a particularly attractive and productive example.
Budget Resolutions — House of Commons, 2017-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Gregory David Clark (Conservative, Centre-right): I have indeed, and I will come on to that in a moment, if my hon. Friend will bear with me Let me say something about skills. We are creating new job opportunities, but I say to the hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Angus Brendan MacNeil), who raised a point about robots, that if jobs change, we need to ensure that people have the ability to train and develop the skills they will need for the jobs that are being created. The consultation on the industrial strategy established what every Member knows: job opportunities, especially in companies in the technical sectors, require education and training, particularly in maths, digital skills and other aspects of our technical education. There are skills shortages around the country, and great careers would be available to young people and to those who are changing career if only they had that educational base. The significant investment in maths, digital and technical education that was announced in the Budget is therefore important, as is the national retraining scheme, which will work with employers and trade unions, beginning with digital and construction training On infrastructure, I can tell the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker) that the Chancellor has announced an £8 billion increase in the national productivity investment fund, taking it to £31 billion, and extended it to 2022-23. That will enable us to invest in our physical infrastructure and also, as my hon. Friend the Member for Henley (John Howell) said, in our digital infrastructure as we develop the next generation of full-fibre networks, trial the use of 5G and boost mobile communication on our railways. That, too, is important right across the country. We will also support electric vehicles through the charging infrastructure fund. If we are going to manufacture those new vehicles, we have to be the place in the world in which they can be deployed most effectively.