argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
DWP Policies and Low-income Households — House of Commons, 2017-01-17
Topic: Labor
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As always, it is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Charnwood (Edward Argar), but he made the same mistake as many of his colleagues who have spoken today. They have merged the Orwellian with the Dickensian. Let me say to the Thatcherites among them that St Francis of Assisi has not had a look in. Marie Antoinette was a philanthropist in comparison with this Government I want to raise two issues, because I do not want them to be swept under the Axminster before the debate ends. I refer to the telephone tax, which my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (Drew Hendry) mentioned. Those who need to phone the Department for Work and Pensions must pay 45p a minute, and, as my hon. Friend said—this is also the experience of my constituents—it costs them between £9 and £16 to make calls just to gain access to the money to which they are entitled because they have not been paid on time. It really is time that that tax ended Why did the Government ignore the clear advice of their own Social Security Advisory Committee, which told them that it would be best to make those numbers 0800 numbers so that the calls would be free? I was told that that would cost £7 million and that the telephony system was being upgraded to include the option of advice on potential wait times for customers. We should picture the scene: someone who is spending 45p a minute on a phone call being told, "You will be answered in 45 minutes." I was amazed to hear that, according to Government Members, closing Glasgow’s jobcentres is a good thing. They said that we have not talked about people getting into work. How are people going to get back into work if 50% of the jobcentres in Glasgow are closed? Why has there only been an announcement of jobcentre closures in Glasgow? Glasgow should not be the guinea pig for the Government’s experiment. Why has there not been an equality impact assessment? Why are we not measuring the impact this will have on the disabled or on women with childcare responsibilities, for instance? No consideration at all is being given to the cost impact on people living off the minimum that the Government provide for day-to-day survival I urge all Members to support the motion.
DWP Policies and Low-income Households — House of Commons, 2017-01-17
Topic: Social Welfare
Patricia Gibson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My breath has been quite taken away by the insensitive, ruthless and, frankly, ill-informed approach of Government Members. They have demonstrated this evening that they are detached from the lives of ordinary people—an expression that one of them has used—which is perhaps why the Tory vote in Scotland is lower now than it was in the 1980s under Thatcher Like so many of my constituents in North Ayrshire and Arran, I am deeply concerned about universal credit, of which much has been said this evening. The stated aim of the UK Government in introducing universal credit is to improve work incentives, simplify the benefits system and reduce fraud and error. Of course, anybody would welcome a system that is simpler and provides better incentives to low-income families to move into sustainable employment, but universal credit does not do that and has been plagued by errors, delays and computer crashes As for the vision of a fairer society outlined by the Prime Minister, how hollow do hon. Members think those words will ring to the average working family in receipt of universal credit? That family will be more than £1,000 a year worse off by 2020, with some families being up to £2,500 a year worse off. Transitional protection, which is limited, simply will not suffice What about those who are just about managing, about whom the Government like to talk? Do the Government not realise that many of those who are just about managing will rely on universal credit to make ends meet? What about child poverty? Child poverty is set to rise dramatically over the next three years, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. There is simply no evidence for the UK Government’s assertion that reducing benefit support incentivises work. The impact assessment of the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 contained no evidence for that It is time to ditch universal credit, which is a failed experiment. It is time to abandon it. It fails those on low pay, it fails the sick, it fails the disabled and it fails to incentivise work. It fails to address inequality, and to continue it shows a failure to understand the lives of those who must suffer its indignities.
Legal Costs: Article 50 — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Law and Crime
Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I think the whole House would like to know that we got value for money in that judgment, and of course there are lots of rights and obligations in many Acts of Parliament and it is the courts’ job to interpret them. Can the Attorney General explain why the Supreme Court held that the Sewel provisions in an Act of Parliament were not a matter for the courts?
Department for Work and Pensions Estate — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Labor
Questions: What assessment the Government have made of the potential effect on equality for social security claimants of its proposals on the future of the Department for Work and Pensions estate.
Gavin Andrew Stuart Newlands (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Last week, the UK Government announced the closure of 15 jobcentre sites in Scotland, including the Lonend site in Paisley. This follows a proposal to close eight jobcentres in Glasgow, which was announced in December. Does the Minister agree that it is a dereliction of duty and an insult to those affected not to conduct an equality impact assessment in advance of these plans, given the hardship that they will cause to thousands of the most disadvantaged people?
Great Repeal Bill — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.
Martyn Day (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Given the importance of the great repeal Bill to the devolved Administrations, will the Leader of the House give a clear guarantee that all Members of this House will be able to scrutinise and vote on all parts of this Bill to ensure that the great repeal Bill does not turn into the great power grab?
Great Repeal Bill — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.
Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Given that we cannot categorically rule out EVEL and that the Secretary of State for Scotland has said that a legislative consent motion will be required for the great repeal Bill, what exactly is the Government’s position?
Great Repeal Bill — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.
Patricia Gibson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Procedure Committee, on which I sit, produced a report that noted: "There is an apparent lack of appetite for debate in legislative grand committee at present." Given that the Government are tabling programme motions that allow absolutely no time for debate, surely the Leader of the House must share my opinion that current EVEL procedures are a piece of nonsense.
Great Repeal Bill — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.
Margaret Ferrier (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The UK Government continue to tell us that Holyrood is the most powerful devolved Parliament, yet they are not consulting Scotland on the triggering of article 50. Does the Leader of the House agree that by also refusing Scottish MPs the opportunity to vote on all areas of the great repeal Bill, the Government are doing everything possible to stop the voice of Scottish people being heard on Brexit?
Great Repeal Bill — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government's planned Great Repeal Bill.; If he will bring forward a motion to disapply Standing Orders No. 83J to 83X from proceedings on the Government’s planned Great Repeal Bill.
Kirsten Frances Oswald (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): During the referendum campaign, we were told that all non-reserved powers would return to Scotland. Worryingly, the UK Government have not opened any discussions with the Scottish Government about that. When will the Government discuss with the Scottish Government what additional powers may be devolved to Scotland as a result of the UK withdrawing from the European Union?
Airport Capacity and Airspace Policy — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Transportation
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for giving me advance sight of his statement We welcome the decision to go ahead with the expansion of Heathrow and the new runway. After many years of waiting, it is time to get on with delivering that, as well as the specific benefits that it can bring. However, building a new runway is meaningless if we do not have access to the air and the EU-US open skies agreement. Does the Secretary of State intend to seek membership of that arrangement The Secretary of State mentioned regional airports, which are vital, and I agree that these connections need to be made. What guarantees will he give to regional airports in Scotland, especially the likes of Dundee and Inverness, about routes and slots following the Heathrow expansion? He also mentioned the need to deal with environmental issues and tackle carbon emissions. What targets will he specify to demonstrate ambition above the legal requirements to which he referred?
Airport Capacity and Airspace Policy — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Transportation
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I welcome the national airport policy, although I note the warning that aviation could become less convenient to use, lowering economic output. Unfortunately, many airports are turning themselves into long, tedious, meandering shopping malls, which inconveniences travellers. Glasgow airport, for example, has a quarter of a kilometre meander that not only hinders those needing to travel, but inconveniences people with mobility issues, particularly those going to gates for flights to the islands. I exclude London City airport from that criticism, but will the airport policy consider travellers as well as shoppers by at least providing a shorter route for them?
Airport Capacity and Airspace Policy — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Transportation
Brendan O'Hara (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Very shortly, there will be a UK mainland airport from which passengers and their luggage will be able to fly directly into a UK international airport without any security checks on passengers or their luggage. The decision by Highlands and Islands Airports to remove security checks, particularly for Campbeltown into Glasgow, is an unnecessary relaxation of a system that has worked well. Were the Government aware of that, and are they happy to see passengers and their luggage flying into a major UK airport without undergoing the security checks that every other passenger and their luggage has to undergo?
Airport Capacity and Airspace Policy — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Foreign Trade
Gavin Andrew Stuart Newlands (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As I explained in the debate on triggering article 50 yesterday, many in the aviation sector think that Brexit may lead to the sector shrinking, thus negating the need for an additional runway. Given the fact that air service agreements lie outside conventional trade agreements and the ambit of the World Trade Organisation, will the Minister confirm whether any talks have taken place with the Trump Administration on a US-UK open skies agreement?
Exiting the EU: New Partnership — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Patrick Gethins (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. He is not a man of few words, but he is perhaps a man of few meaningful words. This is just another panicked U-turn. When it comes to European matters, it is not much of an achievement to be the second most chaotic party in the Chamber. The Government have had seven months in which to pull this together, yet we got the White Paper only a minute before the Secretary of State got to his feet to make his statement. I concede that he is more experienced than I am, but it is striking that we are getting the White Paper after Second Reading of the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill and two sitting days before its Committee stage. How are we to question him about the White Paper when we are given it just before he gets to his feet? I believe that that shows an astonishing disrespect for Parliament. He would not have put up with this were he not on the Government Front Bench What are the Government afraid of? They do not want to give us any opportunity for scrutiny, so there must be something they are afraid of. They do not have the courage of their convictions. Scotland voted to remain as the blue in the red, white and blue Brexit, so are the civil servants having to pull together all these last-minute policy changes? The Secretary of State said in his statement that the devolved legislatures would face "significant changes". Does that mean that a legislative consent motion will now be required? This is a mess; it is a bourach. It is going to have an impact on each and every one of us, and people deserve better.
Exiting the EU: New Partnership — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Foreign Trade
Kirsten Frances Oswald (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Government seem to be in a constant state of delayed reaction, but we finally have the White Paper. It contains a statement on strengthening trade with the world that reads like a tweet, and a conspicuous amount of space that is totally blank. Does that reflect the Government’s thinking on Brexit?
Exiting the EU: New Partnership — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Law and Crime
Margaret Ferrier (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Remarkably, the White Paper does not contain a single reference to Eurojust or any real indication of our future co-operation with the EU on criminal justice matters. That raises the question: if something so significant has been omitted, what else is missing? Never mind a White Paper, this is a lightweight paper.
Exiting the EU: New Partnership — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Foreign Trade
Martin John Docherty-Hughes (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Secretary of State makes much of the process and joked that we might be at this for another two years, yet in that time the unelected and unaccountable House of Lords will have more influence on the implementation of the White Paper, and the negotiations and relationships that we must forge for trade agreements, than the Governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. How does that strengthen the Union?
Armed Forces Covenant — House of Commons, 2017-02-02
Topic: Labor
Martin John Docherty-Hughes (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Earlier today, you may recall that the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union laid a copy of the White Paper before the House. I have my own copy with me. We have found that at least one chart in the document contains incorrect information. Chart 7.1 states that United Kingdom workers are entitled to 14 weeks of annual holiday, whereas the chart should state that they have 5.6 weeks paid holiday. The mistake has led to another error, as the chart claims that European Union minimum maternity leave entitlement is only 5.6 weeks, when it should be 14 weeks. The Scottish National party has corrected the chart for the United Kingdom Government. Perhaps the Minister would like a copy to save his blushes over what appears to have been only a desktop exercise today. Madam Deputy Speaker, would you please instruct me as to how this House can get the accurate, proper information to inform our already rushed debate on this rather important issue?
Yemen — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: International Affairs
Hannah Mary Bardell (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As the suffering in Yemen unfolds, the world watches in horror. Nearly 2.2 million people are internally displaced, half of them women and girls. Evidence from Amnesty International shows that partially exploded, UK-manufactured BL755 cluster bombs are lying unexploded, injuring and maiming many people. Despite the Foreign Office Minister denying their existence, the UK Government’s own investigations back up media reports that such cluster bombs have been deployed in the war in Yemen, so when will this heartless Tory Government wake up, do a proper investigation, take on Saudi Arabia and stop the sale and deployment of these bombs?
Yemen — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: International Affairs
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The single biggest contributor to the humanitarian disaster in Yemen is the Royal Saudi air force, which has systematically destroyed almost the entire infrastructure of the country, leaving 7 million people in danger of starvation because food cannot be got to them. How much worse does the humanitarian crisis have to get before the United Kingdom stops selling £2 billion-worth of weapons per year to a Government who are accused of 250 different war crimes in Yemen?
Jobcentre Plus Offices: Closure — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Labor
Ronald Jack Cowan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The UK Government’s proposal to drastically cut the number of jobcentres and DWP offices across Scotland and, indeed, the UK, including in my constituency of Inverclyde, will have a profound impact on thousands of people desperately seeking work and the support to which they are entitled. It is an insult that there has been a distinct lack of consultation with the communities affected and with our Government in Scotland. That lack of consultation is against the principles of the Smith agreement. Can the Minister explain to me why no consultation took place before the announcement of the closures In my constituency, the proposal is to close Port Glasgow jobcentre and make people from Kilmacolm, Port Glasgow and the east of Greenock travel miles to access DWP services. Disappointingly, this model has been replicated across the UK. That is an utter disgrace and it could push vulnerable people further into crisis, what with the added travel distance and cost placed upon individuals, many of whom have little or no readily available funds to pay for that commute. What assurances can the Minister provide to my constituents that they will still have ready access to Jobcentre Plus and DWP services This should be far more than a spreadsheet exercise. I ask the Minister to put people first. Many Jobcentre Plus staff work hard to build good working relationships with service users, and they are aware of specific issues and needs. Can the Minister guarantee service users the continuity and quality of those working relationships? If the Minister is so certain that the measures are required, will she at least halt their implementation until a full equality impact assessment has been conducted and a full consultation of all sites has taken place; and if not, why not?
Jobcentre Plus Offices: Closure — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Labor
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests May I tell the Minister that the Government appear to be making exactly the same errors as they did with the announcement of the Glasgow closure programme? Will the Minister tell us why the Scottish Government were not consulted, as per the Smith agreement? Why did she say in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde (Ronnie Cowan) that jobcentres have catchment areas, when written answers to Members of the House have suggested that there are no catchment areas for jobcentres? Will she also tell us why the written ministerial statement indicated that redundancies may be required, and may we have further detail on that? Finally, what support, if any, will be available to claimants, particularly those with caring responsibilities, who have to travel greater distances?
Jobcentre Plus Offices: Closure — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Macroeconomics
Mhairi Black (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The DWP administration centre in my constituency is closing, and 300 jobs will be transferred out of Paisley. Has there been any assessment or consideration of the economic impact on the area? Has there been any consultation whatever; and if not, why not?