argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Leaving the EU: Data Protection — House of Commons, 2017-10-12
Topic: Civil Rights
Darren Paul Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I agree with that sentiment. Dare I say it, but very few Government Members are present? Although my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham said this may be an anorak issue, it is in fact crucial to our economy, our new civil liberties and the type of country we want to live in. We should be having such a debate, and I again restate our request that we should do so in this House not only on the Data Protection Bill, but on the GDPR statutory instrument I am looking forward to the Data Protection Bill and I am excited about the Committee stage, but I will take this opportunity to address some of the strategic issues that many Members have mentioned: first, the basis of data protection law in the European charter of fundamental rights, on which I will not revisit the arguments already made but will, I hope, add something interesting and new to the debate; secondly, the incoherence between the necessity to mirror EU law and the Government’s illogical policy approach on Brexit; and lastly, the rights and protections of children First, as we have heard in this debate, the Government have made it clear that the European charter of fundamental rights will be revoked under the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. The Minister said that the GDPR in effect says the same thing, but article 8 of the charter, which underpins the GDPR, is referenced in article 45 of the GDPR. If the GDPR is referencing out to statutory, fundamental rights and we take that anchor away, we must replace it elsewhere. I will therefore support the amendment to the Bill proposed by my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham, to ensure that that happens.
Leaving the EU: Data Protection — House of Commons, 2017-10-12
Topic: Civil Rights
Darren Paul Jones (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister says that the guidance should come out early, but it is already too late in respect of direct applicability of the general data protection regulation for many businesses, which may need to carry out major systems changes if guidance says something that they are not expecting based on interpretation of the article. Will he say to the ICO that, where guidance is late and that makes it harder for organisations to make those changes, there will be some leeway when it comes to enforcement?
UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities — House of Commons, 2017-10-12
Topic: Civil Rights
Luke Pollard (Labour, Centre-left): I congratulate the hon. Lady on her full and extensive contribution. Does she agree that the UN report gave hope to many disabled people who felt that they were not being listened to and that, by not coming to the House to give a full statement, the Government have lost an opportunity to show that they are listening to the needs of disabled people?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: I join the Prime Minister in adding that my thoughts, along with Wealden’s, are with New Yorkers. The shocking scenes in New York will have brought back awful memories of terrorist attacks here, and, as we degrade and destroy Daesh at its base, it will export its death cult ideology. Will my right hon. Friend urge our international partners to join with us in delivering the recent United Nations resolution to investigate and prosecute Daesh terrorists, so that we can hold them to account for their vile crimes?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I put on record that I am happy to meet with the Prime Minister and all party leaders to discuss the sex harassment allegations that the right hon. Lady rightly referred to. We need better protections for all in this House, and the House must involve workplace trade unions in that, but it is also incumbent on all parties to have robust procedures in place to protect and support victims of sexual abuse and harassment I also join the Prime Minister in sending our solidarity to the people of New York and their mayor Bill de Blasio following yesterday’s appalling terrorist attack I hope the whole House will join me in paying tribute to two former Labour colleagues who, sadly, passed away this week: Candy Atherton, the former Member for Falmouth and Camborne, and Frank Doran, former Member for Aberdeen North. Both did enormous good work, at opposite ends of the UK, to diligently represent their communities and constituencies. They will be sadly missed by us all, particularly in the Labour party, which they served so well for their entire lives In 2010, the Labour Government intervened through Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to shut down an Isle of Man scheme used to import yachts into the European Union and thus avoid tax. A similar scheme has recently been exposed relating to the import of business jets into the Isle of Man, so can the Prime Minister assure the House that HMRC will investigate these new allegations diligently?
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): Marketing is obviously a crucial part of the recruitment process, but the Minister needs to be clear. He has given me an answer that makes it clear that every single course—including those at Catterick in the constituency of the hon. Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Rishi Sunak), who has just left—is under-recruited. Every single course at Sandhurst since 2015 has been under-recruited. It is his Government who are leading us to this recruitment crisis. Pay is one part of that, and a crucial part, but he is the Minister and he is in charge.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Nia Rhiannon Griffith (Labour, Centre-left): As the Minister knows well, newspapers do not always report things the right way round. The point we are making about the marketing costs is that they have rocketed. The question is, what value for money are those costs providing? What value for money is the contract with Capita providing? What evaluation have the Government done of whether the money spent on Capita—spent on marketing—is providing value for money in view of the returns they are getting? That is what we want to see.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Gareth Thomas (Labour, Centre-left): Two years ago, the Government set up an armed forces credit union to help armed forces personnel on low pay who might be vulnerable to payday loan companies charging very high rates of interest. Two years on, the three armed forces credit unions are well-established, but could do with the MOD taking steps to advertise their services more widely. Given that 15 years ago the right hon. Gentleman showed a brief interest in co-operatives, may I encourage him to join me in encouraging the Minister to think through what else the MOD might do now to encourage awareness of that armed forces credit union among military personnel?
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Ruth Smeeth (Labour, Centre-left): Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that one of the problems with that contract is the existing key performance indicators? The contractor gets a big tick for turning up within 24 hours, but that does not mean that the boiler has been fixed. That could take another eight days. The letter of the contract might be being fulfilled, but it is definitely not being fulfilled in spirit.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I thought the Cameron Kool-Aid had been dispensed with. That figure was plucked out of thin air. I recommend that the hon. Gentleman look at the 2010 National Audit Office report that says that there would be a £6 billion so-called black hole over the next 10 years. The Conservatives dishonestly tried to give the impression that there was a £38 billion black hole to be met in 2010. Both the right hon. Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) and the right hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), his successor as Defence Secretary and now Chancellor, miraculously got rid of that black hole within 18 months and said that it had been plugged—do not ask me how they did it. If they could get rid of a £38 billion black hole in less than 18 months, they are in the wrong job. That was complete nonsense. The hon. Member for Witney (Robert Courts) should stop repeating things that are just not true. I give the Conservatives credit for their great job of changing the narrative at the time, but the actual facts are different.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. It is up to the shadow Minister to give way, or not. My understanding is that there was no giving way earlier, so if there is tit for tat, that is up to each individual; it is not for the Chair. What I do not want is this continuous barracking across the Chamber, with Members saying, "He is not giving way" and, "Will he give way?". [Interruption.] Order. There are no more contributions, are there? Wayne David, please.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. The Minister should sit down for a second Mr Lancaster, I do not know whether you are deliberately trying to frustrate the Chair—I am sure that is not your intention—but you are going a good way towards doing so. Let me help you. It is up to the Opposition spokesman when he sits down. The Minister has asked for extra time to respond, so you should be thanking Mr David for sitting down to give him that extra time. Let us have less chuntering, and let us hear from Minister Ellwood.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. First, if the Minister takes the intervention both Members cannot be on their feet and he cannot suddenly say, "I don’t want to hear any more of it." In fairness, if he gives way he needs to let the intervention get to the end. If I think the intervention is too long, let me take that decision. Let us not have both Members on their feet.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Hang on. The Minister has been here long enough; you know you have got to sit down. Please, let us follow the rules of engagement. As ex-Army personnel, you are very good at that. Kevan Jones.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): It is a serious point of order. The right hon. Gentleman gave way to me, and then he stood up when I had not finished. But the serious point is that what he is saying is not true—not the facts—and as a Minister, he should not be actually saying that.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Sir Mike Penning, thank you. Your knighthood goes before us. [Interruption.] Order. Now, we know that that is not the parliamentary way. I am sure the hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) does not mean it in the sense in which it was given.
Armed Forces Pay — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. All I am saying is that accurate information must be given. If the Minister looks at the NAO report from 2010, he will see the actual figure, instead of the bluster which he keeps—
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): The last debate got fractious just before 4 o’clock because interventions might or might not have been taken; I have taken pretty well all of them so far, but none of them has yet been about the motion. [Interruption.] I apologise to the right hon. Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry) and my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) for saying that.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that there is a hint of almost religious fervour with the idea that if we keep our eyes closed and our ears blocked, perhaps everything will be okay as we leap off the cliff into the unknown.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I can see that if I keep giving way, I will get answers that relate to every Department and find out that in fact none of them has seen, analysed, read or considered the impact assessments.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I am surprised by that intervention, given the concerns expressed by the right hon. Member for Broxtowe, the right hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve) and the hon. Member for Totnes (Dr Wollaston). The concern is shared on both sides of the House The intervention of the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Mr Jenkin) is typical of what has been going on for 16 or 17 months. Every time somebody raises a legitimate question, it is suggested that they are somehow frustrating or undermining the process. It is not unlike the interventions I took a year ago when I suggested that the plan should be published. The interventions were exactly the same This is lockdown, a blanket ban. If the exemption for ministerial advice is being relied on, it is curious that it is not mentioned as the ground being relied on in the letter in response to the freedom of information request. That is why we have brought this motion to the House—
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I do acknowledge that. To explain, we were advised by the parliamentary authorities that that needed to be included in the motion in order for the second part to be triggered. I acknowledge, though, that that list was published on Monday.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Benjamin Peter James Bradshaw (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Given the exchange that we have just heard, would it be possible to have a ruling from the Chair about the enforceability and binding nature of this motion?
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. What advice might you be able to get from the Clerk of the House, perhaps during the course of this debate, on whether the motion is binding? It is important for the House to know that information. I appreciate that you might not be able to rule on it at this moment, but I would also appreciate it if we could get that advice in due course.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Benjamin Peter James Bradshaw (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just wondered, in the intervening period since the previous points of order, whether you had managed to seek advice from the Clerks on the enforceability and binding nature of this motion.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. "Erskine May" is written in black and white. It makes it absolutely clear, as the hon. Member for North East Somerset (Mr Rees-Mogg) mentioned—I am partially giving you time to read page 819 in case you need to, Madam Deputy Speaker—that if the House chose to, it could refer each and every individual Minister who chose to ignore the decision of the House to the Committee on Privileges, and they could then be suspended from membership of the House.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): The answer is that it is for the Government, not for me, to respond on that point. There has been a question about whether this is binding. What is binding is the need to carry forward the debate. Let us have no more ado.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): Each of us has a responsibility as a parliamentarian—it is the basic reason why we are here—to represent those who have put us here. It is our duty as parliamentarians to ask questions and gain information in order to make correct judgments on how we vote. That is why we want to see the impact assessments for the various sectors. Speaking for my constituency, the three sectors that I am most concerned about are construction, production and the creative industries, and medical services and social care. I simply want to be able to explain to my constituents the way that I will be voting over the coming months.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Shaun Ruane (Labour, Centre-left): Would my hon. Friend add the British aerospace industry to that list? In north Wales, 7,000 jobs in one factory in Broughton depend on it. With 100,000 jobs in total, would aerospace be up there on her list of sectors that we need information on?
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. There seems to be in the Government’s mind some belief that they should do all the redaction. If the House decides that the impact assessments should be provided to a Select Committee, I believe it would be better if the Select Committee could then decide what it was going to publish. The serious, important point is that were any member of that Committee to breach the Committee’s decisions and publish the impact assessments willy-nilly, off their own bat, I am sure you would agree that that would be a matter of privilege. It would be a contempt of Parliament.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Lilian Rachel Greenwood (Labour, Centre-left): I will be very brief. Does my hon. Friend agree that the opposition given by Government Members is wholly confused? Of the last two speakers, one said that the reports cannot be released because that would lay open our hand in the negotiations and the other admitted that it would not because they would be provided in confidence to the Select Committee.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): What I said in my opening was in criticism of the blanket ban. I said that the Government should consider first whether any of the material needs to be withheld and, if so, whether bits of it could be released—summaries or gists. I was criticising the Government’s approach because they had not already gone through that exercise, which they should have gone through; I was not actually talking about what the motion means.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I am afraid that I will not give way The motion has been tabled in the interests of transparency and accountability. It has drawn support from both sides of the House, and it should command the support of the Government, not simply—as the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker) said in his opening remarks—to pay regard to the motion but, as the hon. Member for North East Somerset (Mr Rees-Mogg) said, to respect it. The credibility of our democracy is at stake. If the Government do not plan to honour this motion, they should vote against it. They should choose to sit on their hands only if they intend to respect the motion in full, and I hope that they will do so.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Nicholas Hugh Brown (Labour, Centre-left): claimed to move the closure (Standing Order No. 36). Question put forthwith, That the Question be now put Question agreed to. Main Question accordingly put and agreed to. Resolved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, That she will be graciously pleased to give directions that the list of sectors analysed under the instruction of Her Majesty’s Ministers, and referred to in the Answer of 26 June 2017 to Question 239, be laid before this House and that the impact assessments arising from those analyses be provided to the Committee on Exiting the European Union Address to be presented to Her Majesty by Members of the House who are Privy Counsellors or Members of Her Majesty’s Household.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Would you assist the House in explaining how serious it is for any person, a Member of this House or someone outside it, to be in contempt of the House? Were an individual to be found in contempt of the House, that would not be a frivolous matter—it is not something that should be just ignored. Page 191 of "Erskine May" sets out the consequences for individuals found in contempt of the House and the penal jurisdiction rights of this Parliament. I would be grateful if you explained to Ministers present that this is a very serious matter.
Exiting the EU: Sectoral Impact Assessments — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Dennis Edward Skinner (Labour, Centre-left): I know that Mr Speaker likes to reply to points of order, so I will just throw him one. He and I have been here a long time, so, like me, does he feel that the Government are dying on their feet?
St Mary Magdalene and Holy Jesus Trust: Leasehold — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Other
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): I recognise the advantage of the Minister setting that out, but I hope that before he concludes his remarks he will specifically say what he will do for my constituents, for whom I called this debate.
St Mary Magdalene and Holy Jesus Trust: Leasehold — House of Commons, 2017-11-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for his comments and the tenor, which I appreciate, of his response to my debate. Will he confirm that he will work with the Charity Commission to ensure that, in this regard, charities set out to be good citizens and good neighbours, and that the brand of charities is not open to criticism?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The measures in this group have a number of things in common, and they relate largely to the rights and freedoms that many of our citizens enjoy, without debate or discussion—they are sometimes taken for granted—but that could well be threatened if we do not get this legislative process right Of course, the Bill was supposed to be merely a "copy and paste" piece of legislation. We were told that there were no fundamental changes in Government policy and that it was all very straightforward. The Government said, "We are leaving the European Union and becoming a freestanding United Kingdom, so we will simply cut and paste all the EU regulations and laws as they stand into UK law." However, you will notice, Mrs Laing, particularly in schedule 1, that a number of things are not to be transposed. The Government have specifically chosen not to bring across the charter of fundamental rights.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): It turns out that the charter does have value, and it certainly does have effect within the UK. I will shortly give some practical examples to show how we cannot simply airbrush this part of our current legislative framework. Many citizens, companies and organisations recognise the value that the charter brings.