argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-14
Topic: International Affairs
Stuart Campbell McDonald (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): This Bill is an outrage. We are thumbing our nose at international law, our Irish friends and EU allies, even while still in negotiations with them. It would be farcically funny, were it not so deadly serious. The Prime Minister has been double dealing not only with our international partners but with ordinary people, because the oven-ready deal he sold has been shown to be nothing more than a pig in a poke. That the Bill has been introduced, never mind that it will almost certainly be passed by the Chamber, is extraordinary. It is hugely damaging to the reputation of the UK, and it speaks starkly to the drastic weaknesses and feeble checks and balances at the heart of the UK constitution The Bill lays bare the Government’s attitudes to devolution and democratic accountability—in short, they do not care for it one jot. The Government pretend they are merely adopting an EU-style approach to creating a single market, but they are doing nothing of the sort. Where we should have had consent and co-operation, we have imposition; instead of subsidiarity, we have centralisation; instead of minimum standards, we have the starting gun for a race to the bottom; instead of protecting devolved powers, devolved powers are being reserved or utterly undermined The Bill speaks more broadly to the direction of travel that we face in the United Kingdom. Instead of a partnership of equals, it is "Westminster knows best." Yet again, one Parliament—this Parliament—is unilaterally altering the competencies of another, and giving Ministers the power to do so again and again at the stroke of a pen. That does not happen in other western democracies where there would be double majorities, super majorities, and referendums before one Parliament or Government could take powers from another. Perhaps the one positive from the Bill is that it makes plain like never before that the constitution of the British state is not fit for purpose, and it flags up the real dangers that lie ahead if Scotland remains part of it.
Policy on International Law: Strength of the Union — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: International Affairs
Thomas Sheppard (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Given that the Cabinet Office refused to answer my written questions within the agreed timescales, will the Minister confirm whether his Department undertakes opinion polling and research into public attitudes to the Union? If that is the case, will he commit to putting that information in the public domain, since it is paid for by the taxpayer?
Policy on International Law: Strength of the Union — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: International Affairs
David Melvyn Linden (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): It seems to be the approach of a slippery fish from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. How much money—UK taxpayers’ money—is he spending on this private polling? Given that all public polling shows that there is an increase in support for Scottish independence, is it not correct that support for the Union is pretty weak at the moment and it is only a matter of time before Scotland becomes an independent country?
Policy on International Law: Strength of the Union — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: International Affairs
Elizabeth Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): This House has approved a Bill that allows the democratically elected Scottish Government to be overruled by the right hon. Gentleman’s Government—happy to ignore laws they have not made, happy to break treaties and hungry to take power from everywhere they can. Alongside this appalling level of respect for the law and for Scotland, can I at least highlight one silver lining and thank him for the contribution he is making towards Scotland’s independence?
Policy on International Law: Strength of the Union — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: International Affairs
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If the right hon. Gentleman’s Union is so strong, as he contends, can he tell me why he thinks Scottish independence is at a record high of 55% and has been at a sustained majority all year?
Policy on International Law: Strength of the Union — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: International Affairs
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The right hon. Gentleman will not produce his own opinion polls and he will not believe actual opinion polls, so maybe I will give him a few suggestions as to why support for Scottish independence is so high. He can see if he agrees with me in this. How about this? The power grab; the attacks on our democracy in Parliament; the contempt this place shows for our beautiful country; the constantly saying no to a majority of our people in Scotland; taking our nation out of the EU against our national collective will; the Prime Minister; him. Do any of them sound familiar to him at all?
Lifetime Skills Guarantee and Post-16 Education — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: Education
Carol Frances Monaghan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. On the face of it, this move towards skills education is positive, and I certainly welcome the recognition that further education in England finally seems to be receiving, and I am delighted that, once again, he is following Scotland’s lead when he talks of closer alignment between further and higher education, because I have said many times in this place that Scotland does not draw a distinction between FE and HE and that we concentrate on positive destinations, and with good reason. We have the highest percentage of positive destinations for young people in the UK Many times, however, I have been lectured by Government Members about university numbers. They cannot have it both ways. If further education in England has been playing second fiddle to higher education, it is because the Secretary of State’s Government have treated it as such. As Scotland has invested in the entire tertiary education landscape, FE in England has suffered a decade of neglect. So can the Secretary of State confirm whether this lifetime loan entitlement means that FE students in England will now be saddled with the same massive debts as their HE counterparts, and since his Government seem to be open to new ideas, when will he be readdressing the issue of their outrageous tuition fees? I welcome the long-overdue investment in FE infrastructure in England, but will the Secretary of State acknowledge that if he were to match Scotland’s facilities funding, the figure he would be announcing today would be not £1.5 billion, but £8 billion Finally, the Scottish Government have committed to a lifelong learning strategy and are investing £25 million to support adults retraining. However, similar courses will not be available in England until April 2021. Those whose jobs have been affected by covid cannot wait seven months, so will the Secretary of State work with colleagues to ensure this funding is brought forward and people can start training immediately?
Social Security (Up-rating of Benefits) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: Labor
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Secretary of State for giving way; I know that she has other business this afternoon. As well as uprating, many of us in the House have a concern about the lack of uptake of pension credit. Will she tell us what measures her Department will take to ensure that there is a better uptake of that particular benefit?
Social Security (Up-rating of Benefits) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-01
Topic: Macroeconomics
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment 1, page 1, line 10, leave out from "State" to the end of line 15 and insert— "shall lay before Parliament the draft of an order which increases each of the amounts referred to in subsection (1) above by a percentage no less than— (a) the difference between the general level of earnings at the beginning of the period under review and the general level of earnings at the end of that period, or (b) the difference between the general level of prices at the beginning of the period under review and the general level of prices at the end of that period, or (c) 2.5%, (none) whichever is the greater." This amendment would require the Secretary of State to up-rate the benefits to which this Act applies in accordance with the "triple lock" of the higher of increases in prices, increases in earnings or 2.5%.
Covid-19: Fiscal Support — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Social Welfare
David Melvyn Linden (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I hear what the Chancellor says, but emergency food parcels for children are up 107% this year and the Trussell Trust now expects to distribute 300,000 more than expected in the fourth quarter. Given that there is a hard Tory Brexit on the horizon and the end to the furlough scheme will certainly push more people into poverty, will the Chancellor do the right thing, adhere to his moral duty and make the £20-a-week increase to universal credit permanent?
Covid-19: Fiscal Support — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Labor
Alison Emily Thewliss (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): That is woefully inadequate, as we head into the winter, for many of these industries that have already suffered with a low income. The Chancellor said that he would do "whatever it takes" and that "if the situation changed", he "would not hesitate to take further action." Those excluded from support schemes, the 700,000 made redundant since March and those losing their jobs because of the premature ending of the furlough scheme want to know whether the Chancellor will be true to that commitment or his words are worth nothing.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Macroeconomics
Patricia Gibson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Scottish Government analysis has revealed that ending the transition period in 2020 could cut £3 billion from the Scottish economy over the next two years—on top of the impact of coronavirus. With the UK Internal Market Bill making the risk of a no-deal Brexit even greater, what reassurances can the Chancellor give to my constituents and the people of Scotland that there will be no real-term spending cuts that will inflict even greater damage on our economy?
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment 28, page 20, line 31, leave out ", Scotland" This amendment would exempt from the operation of Part 4 (independent advice on and monitoring of UK internal market) regulatory provisions applying in Scotland which did not apply to the whole of the UK.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Dame Rosie, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I rise to talk to amendments 28 to 30 in my name and those of my right hon. and hon. Friends When the Institute for Government warned that "it is not clear how disputes around the functioning of the internal market will be managed", it opened up the yawning and damning gap in the plans for the governance of the internal market. As a result of ditching co-operation over common frameworks, this Government propose to fill the gap with an Office for the Internal Market—an unelected quango. I will return to the composition of that body shortly. The Office for the Internal Market will have an effective veto over the Scottish Parliament, and the subsequent result is that devolution will be hamstrung. This is yet another step in introducing a system where standards are set by Westminster and they must be accepted by Scotland in devolved areas Analysis by the Scottish Government has revealed that successful Scottish policies such as alcohol minimum unit pricing, our policy on tuition fees and the ban on smoking in public places would be among the Bills referred to the Office for the Internal Market. That has been opposed by many bodies who have shone a light on this. The National Farmers Union Scotland has raised a series of concerns about the function of the Office for the Internal Market’s dispute resolution mechanism in managing policy differences, ensuring that the UK Government do not have the final say on areas of devolved policy, including agriculture, and enabling the devolved Administrations to act where it is considered that a policy aligning in a particular manner is unfavourable to devolved interests such as agriculture Of course, it would not have to worry about that if the UK Government had simply continued work on common frameworks. Common frameworks are designed to manage cross-UK divergence where EU law and devolved competencies intersect, including in relation to the functioning of the UK domestic market, together with existing processes for regulatory impact assessment and existing structures for regulatory co-operation and information sharing. Let us be clear: they do not need to be supplemented or undermined by a new, unelected body.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Government Operations
Patrick John Grady (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Does this not get to the crunch? Government Members keep asking what powers are being taken away from the Scottish Parliament. My hon. Friend is outlining it—the power that is being taken away is the power to make all these decisions. The Scottish Parliament is going to be trumped by an unelected, unrepresentative body, instead of having agreements between the devolved Governments and the UK Government on the framework basis, which should be being implemented.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Agriculture
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Yes, I am saying that, but that is also what the National Farmers Union is saying. It is also what the Institute for Government has pointed out. A number of other bodies have pointed out that this is just not necessary. We have something that we could work with, with co-operation, but of course, the UK Government do not want co-operation, consultation and working together. They just want to impose their will, and that is what they are trying to do again. This Bill not only undermines the basic foundations of devolution but goes further, hitting all existing mechanisms for co-operation and the development of common frameworks. It is not this abomination that is required; it is the establishment of the common frameworks mutually agreed, developed and implemented through consent, with effective governance and processes for regulatory impact.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: International Affairs
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): This is the argument that Government Members try to propagate all the time—that if these powers came to Scotland, they would immediately be transferred to unelected people in the EU. Two things are wrong with that. First, nobody in the EU is actually unelected when they make decisions; they are all elected by either the Parliament or the people who go there. The second and most fundamental point is that, under these proposals, the UK Government are simply taking all control and overriding the ability of Members of the Scottish Parliament to do their job by representing the people who voted for them and their choices.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I will make some progress The UK Government say that they want to "guarantee the continued right of all UK companies to trade unhindered in every part of the UK." Under this proposal, businesses simply have to have deep enough pockets to challenge the democratic decisions of the Scottish Parliament and the Members elected by the people of Scotland to represent and make decisions further for them. For some, it will be "Sale of the Century" or "Bargain Hunt" as they go looking for these things. For those who set their sights on Scottish domestic choices, it does not stretch the imagination much to picture private health companies or private water companies operating in England looking at our publicly owned organisations and seeking to claim that, under the UK Government’s auspices, they have a guaranteed right to trade in Scotland. That is the first big flashing red light here.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: International Affairs
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): That sort of attitude towards what should be co-operation over our common interest underlines the contempt that has been shown for the devolved nations. It is yet another example As I have said, we cannot and will not accept this legislation in any form. All the Bill does is simply and plainly underline why the democratic choices that represent Scottish people and the protection of our Parliament can only be delivered through the powers of independence for Scotland, so that it can take its place as an independent nation among the other independent nations of the world.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Agriculture
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Let us come to the here and now, looking at this Bill. Say, in the future, the Scottish Government want to support the Scottish farming industry, but the UK Government have decided that, as free marketeers, they want to pool all support for their farmers. Under these proposals, is it not the case then that Scottish state aid for their farmers would be ruled illegal and they would not be able to trade in the UK internal market?
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am going to answer the hon. Gentleman’s question. The Scottish National party wants Scotland to remain part of the European Union—a single market of more than 500 million consumers. The SNP does not wish to put up trade barriers with England. It is his party that wishes to enforce upon us trade barriers if we dare to exercise our democratic right of self-determination, which he has spent the last 40 years banging on about in this House for England.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Government Operations
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the hon. Gentleman for allowing me to make good my deficit in not answering his question fully. I am happy to try to do so now. I understand that before the Bill was introduced, the Joint Ministerial Committee, with Ministers on both sides, was working on a programme, with some success, I understand, by which all these issues could have been ironed out in a collaborative and consultative way with each of the Governments of the devolved nations, but that has now been torn asunder. I look forward to the answer to the question about how this collaboration will work in the future, given that the Bill simply overlays that with an unelected quango and the ability for the BEIS Secretary and this Parliament to make the ultimate decision.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: International Affairs
James Neale Hanvey (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Before I consider part 4, I wish briefly to set the context of the comments that I will make Yesterday, Scotland’s friends in the EU and the wider international community were concerned that a UK Prime Minister was prepared to sacrifice the rule of law in a vain attempt to save his own bacon. Of course, there is disbelief that this arrogance is voiced outside the Cummings bubble, but the deliberate trashing of the UK’s international standing is now endorsed by 340 parliamentarians so can no longer be regarded as the ravings of a few. They are all now complicit in this grand folly of legislation. The Bill is a disgraceful piece of legislation led by a Prime Minister whose words mean nothing and a party that is lurching ever further to the right, breaking the rules, acting unlawfully and now rewriting its own laws, while rubbishing any moral authority the UK had to hold rogue states—
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: International Affairs
James Neale Hanvey (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Thank you, Dame Rosie. My preface to my comments was just to set the scene, which is what I am doing, but as I move on my comments will relate to the amendments The Prime Minister has presided over a summer of U-turns, U-turned on his own Brexit deal and turned away from the rule of law. The comments in terms of Scotland can be summed up by the Law Society of Scotland’s reflections on the Bill. It has stated that "as a matter of principle" the Bill should comply with the oldest principle of international law, "pacta sunt servanda (agreements are to be kept)" Quite unfortunately, Scotland has a head start in knowing the hollowness of such a principle. [Interruption.] I’m sorry?
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Government Operations
Patrick John Grady (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Is not the power grab compounded by the fact that the Government clearly intend to push this legislation through without legislative consent to the Bill from any of the devolved Administrations? When they ask, "Where is the power grab? Give us an example," that is it. They are refusing even to accept the fact that the devolved legislatures will not consent to the Bill and they will not engage in its detail. The power grab runs right the way through this process.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-15
Topic: Foreign Trade
James Neale Hanvey (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The hon. Lady raises a really interesting point. I wanted to get it into my remarks, and she has now given me a very clear avenue in which to do it. I cannot understand how she could come up with the suggestion that the UK would enforce its own internal tariffs, but with regard to Scottish competitiveness in this internal market, Scotland is already at a disadvantage. There is a company in my constituency that imports chassis from the EU but does not make its lorries here completely—like many of its EU competitors, it buys certain parts and puts them together. Those EU companies would be allowed to import a fully completed vehicle without any tariff, while that company would be subject to a high tariff on the importation of those chassis and therefore at a competitive disadvantage. That is because of Brexit. I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her point. I would also be grateful if the Minister took cognisance of my comments and gave me a detailed response about how the Government will protect companies such as that in my constituency from this type of disadvantage in the importation of completed vehicles.