argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Welfare (Terminal Illness) — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Jessica Elizabeth Morden (Labour, Centre-left): And I think it probably does mean that from the Minister’s indication In his comments, the Minister also cited three areas for potential changes: the six-month rule, improving consistency in the system and raising awareness to ensure that people know what is available to them through the special rules. I agree with Macmillan that any reform of the special rules should be accompanied by a renewed programme of engagement with clinicians to ensure they are properly supported to implement them. I also hope we can address the issue of non-medically trained assessors challenging doctors The Bill is not a money Bill, but it does call again on the Government to look at changes that can and should be made. In Scotland, which has some devolved powers in this area, the Scottish Parliament passed the Social Security (Scotland) Act in 2018, thus removing the six-month restriction. The changes in Scotland will provide an indefinite award to claimants under the special rules, rather than a maximum of three years In 21st century Britain we cannot tolerate a situation where our most vulnerable citizens and their families are forced to spend their final months together wrestling with the complexities of an obstructive benefits system. In a recent MND meeting in Parliament, a daughter quoted her father as saying: "It was degrading to feel that I had to beg for financial support from a system I had paid into most of my life. I felt abandoned and reduced to a number." The word "terminal" should be enough. It should not be about time, as no one can guarantee how long the terminally ill will live, regardless of their prognosis. The criteria for the terminally ill need to change before more people suffer at the hands of this system As Madeleine Moon said so powerfully in a speech in this place back in 2018 when she was an MP: The unknown time you have must not be spent worrying about accessing benefits or keeping a roof over your head; it must be spent in love, laughter, and taking the painful journey together with dignity and compassion.—[Official Report, 18 July 2018; Vol. 645, c. 456.] I ask the Government to look at this matter again: to publish the details of the review and consider making suitable provisions to ensure that our welfare system works for the people it was built to serve in their time of need Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Jessica Morden, Peter Aldous, Drew Hendry, Hywel Williams, Dr James Davies, Tonia Antoniazzi, Chris Evans, Carolyn Harris, Judith Cummins, Matt Western, Nick Smith and Mark Tami present the Bill Jessica Morden accordingly presented the Bill Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 27 November, and to be printed (Bill 169).
Southern Heathrow Rail Link — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Transportation
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the hon. Lady for giving way and congratulate her on securing this Adjournment debate. She will know that this is an issue on which I have been engaged for over four years. In 2015, Hounslow Council put forward a proposed route for southern rail access to Heathrow from London and Surrey, including a station in Bedfont in my constituency. That was important to underpin regeneration proposals around Heathrow, and its benefit-cost ratio was very favourably assessed by Network Rail. Does she agree that this is a very opportune time to reconsider the economic benefits of such a proposal, not least in terms of the skilled jobs and greener infrastructure that we so desperately need and the direct link from Waterloo to Heathrow that could come from it? Along with my wonderful hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi), who is on the shadow Front Bench, I also want to mention the opportunity to consider western rail access to Heathrow, which has had Government approval since 2012.
Southern Heathrow Rail Link — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Transportation
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister and I have spoken briefly on this matter since he took up his post. May I make a request to him because I think there is an opportunity in this world of projects to move forward? Sometimes there has not been a coherent debate, a proper assessment and proper criteria against which to evaluate a scheme. In the interests of the hon. Member for Guildford (Angela Richardson), who wants to see support for her constituents, in the interests of regeneration, and knowing that it takes two buses sometimes to get one and a half miles to Heathrow for my constituents as well, for work or for travel, is it time to convene a small cross-party taskforce in this place to look at how we might break through some of that and give those perspectives from our constituencies to help move this forward for the Minister?
Air Pollution: Motor Vehicles — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Katharine Helen Brooks-Osborne (Labour, Centre-left): As the north-east seeks to reduce its level of air pollution, will the Minister join me in supporting initiatives such as that proposed for the Tyne tunnel, where a new free-flow payment system will reduce carbon emissions from vehicles using the tunnel by a massive 90%? Furthermore, will the Minister commit to working with colleagues in the Department for Transport to ensure that orders to implement the system are introduced to the House when available, so that air quality improves in the Jarrow constituency and in the region more widely?
Air Pollution — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Eleanor Claire Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): Prior to covid-19, polluted air was contributing to more than 40,000 premature deaths each year. It we are to reduce that awful statistic, we must set enforceable targets to bring air pollution down below harmful levels, so does the Minister agree that the Government’s Environment Bill must have air quality targets that follow World Health Organisation guidance and have an attainment deadline of 2030 or before?
Air Pollution — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Victoria Jane Foxcroft (Labour, Centre-left): This just shows how important this issue is to the people of Lewisham New data published by City Hall on 3 October show a dramatic improvement in London’s air quality since 2016 due in no small part to the ambitious measures implemented by Mayor Sadiq Khan. However, air pollution remains a major public health challenge and complacency is not an option, despite the current crisis. Will the Government commit to setting ambitious national targets and give local authorities the powers and the funding that they need to achieve them?
Air Pollution — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Ruth Lorraine Jones (Labour, Centre-left): Campaigners, activists and our constituents are all waiting with bated breath for the return of the Environment Bill, which has dropped off the Order Paper for more than 200 days now and counting. When the Bill finally returns to the House, will the Minister commit to including the World Health Organisation’s guideline air pollution limits in it? She has already said today that she wants the evidence base to be in it, but the WHO has done the work, so can we not have a commitment to accept these guidelines?
Countryside Protection — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State will know that he is popular in the House, and he is a very mild-mannered, pleasant chap. I want him to turn into some sort of ravening big beast, because he has been in the job nine months, and we have soil degradation, habitat loss and species extinction, while none of our rivers and streams is fit to paddle in, let alone swim in. When is he going to wake up to the crisis that is facing our countryside and do something about it? It is not, "What’s the plan, Stan?"; it is "What’s the plan, George?"
Water Companies: Leaks and Wastage — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Rachel Louise Hopkins (Labour, Centre-left): This month’s Environment Agency report found that four out of the nine water companies are now rated as poor or requiring improvement—the worst result since 2011. Does the Minister agree that losing 3 billion litres of water a day through leakage is wholly unacceptable? Are her Government reconsidering the privatisation of water companies that have damaged the environment and left customers in my constituency with unaffordable bills?
Water Companies: Leaks and Wastage — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Grahame Mark Morris (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for that response, but daily losses through leakage did fall during the 1990s from 4.5 billion litres a day to 3 billion litres. That figure is still too high, and a recent report by the Public Accounts Committee stated that this reduction had been followed by "a decade of complacency and inaction" Does the Minister agree that the Government are failing to hold the water companies to account over their inability to deal with this level of leakage?
Water Companies: Leaks and Wastage — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Stephanie Louise Peacock (Labour, Centre-left): A study by the National Audit Office shows that some parts of England will run out of water by 2040. Does the Minister agree that the targets set by the Department to cut water leakage in half by 2050 will be too little, too late to keep our taps running?
Food Production Standards: Trade Deals — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Agriculture
Virendra Kumar Sharma (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Secretary of State for his response, but in that case, why did the Government reject the pleas of their own Back Benchers only two days ago to protect our food standards, in line with the manifesto promises they made in December?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Barry Strachan Gardiner (Labour, Centre-left): The world needs to stop the loss of species and endangered species need the conservation work of zoos, so I applauded when the Government announced their £100 million package to support zoos and the vital conservation work they do, but then I discovered the eligibility criterion that they must have less than 12 weeks’ reserves. The trustees of any zoo with less than 12 weeks’ reserves would already have declared voluntary liquidation, so will the Secretary of State look again at the criterion, replace it with one based on percentage of revenue lost and—
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Agriculture
Luke Pollard (Labour, Centre-left): Can the Secretary of State confirm that he has a plan to let food produced to lower standards in to Britain if a few extra pence is charged on tariffs, meaning that our farmers will still be undercut if tariff protection is introduced as an excuse to allowing lower quality food into our country?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Agriculture
Emma Ann Hardy (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Secretary of State explain what the Government are putting in place, in the event of a deal not being concluded by 31 December, to allow the UK distant waters fishing fleet to continue to fish for Arctic cod?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Jessica Elizabeth Morden (Labour, Centre-left): Food price increases due to harvests and Brexit, combined with cuts in support for those needing help in the pandemic, will hit the poorest families in our communities hardest. In the light of Louise Casey’s comments this morning, what is the Government’s plan to tackle food poverty, and will they follow the Welsh Government in guaranteeing free school meals during holidays until Easter 2021?
Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Catherine Jane Smith (Labour, Centre-left): Any Church should be a haven for children and young people to be able to grow in Christ but to do so in safety. The report found that 390 clergy and leaders in the Church of England were convicted of child abuse between the 1940s and 2018, but many more will have evaded punishment for their crimes. In fact, in 2018 alone, we heard that 449 concerns were raised about child sexual abuse relating to church leaders, so does the Commissioner agree that historical complaints against living alleged perpetrators must be investigated and justice brought for their victims? Can he outline what action the Church is taking to ensure that those found guilty of offences are removed as a threat to children?
May 2021 Local Elections: Registration and Participation — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Government Operations
Mary Elizabeth Twist (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister for the Constitution recently confirmed that no new funding will be available to local authorities for the running of the May 2021 elections. Is the Electoral Commission content that enough funding is available to put in place the necessary measures to ensure that the May 2021 elections are covid-secure?
Church of England Estate: Woodland — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Environment
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): The 4% English cover puts it at the very bottom of the list. As I understand it, there are 105,000 acres in England. Why is the figure so low? Is there not a strategy to increase that cover, given that we know how important the role of trees is in natural carbon sequestration? Could the Church of England not do an awful lot better when it comes to England?
Electoral Commission: Political Independence — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Government Operations
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): Apologies, Mr Speaker. I have only been here 19 years; I am just getting used to it I welcome the hon. Member for Midlothian (Owen Thompson) to his place and send best wishes to the hon. Member for City of Chester (Christian Matheson) for a speedy recovery. I recently undertook election monitoring training with the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. One of the features of any good democratic process is an independent electoral commission, and that is what we have—one that is not afraid to take on the governing party, if necessary, from time to time. I therefore encourage the hon. Member to resist some of the calls from Conservative Members and from the Conservative party to abolish the Electoral Commission, and to ensure, as is required, that the new chair appointed is someone who is not a member of any political party, has not served as an MP, and has not donated to a political party in the past five years.
Covid-19 Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Education
Katharine Helen Brooks-Osborne (Labour, Centre-left): In my constituency, schools are already closing due to confirmed cases of coronavirus. What conversations has the Secretary of State had on routine testing in schools? Will he publish the science behind the decision not to introduce routine testing for teachers and tell us why schools have been issued with only 10 testing kits each?
Covid-19 Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Macroeconomics
Anthony Joseph Lloyd (Labour, Centre-left): I have to ask the Secretary of State, as another Member of Parliament who, in his words, is "up there": does he understand that people in Greater Manchester fear that an indefinite period in tier 3 would mean the pauperisation of our people and the destruction, at least in the short and medium term, of our economic capacity, with no certainty—unless he really does get test, track and trace not just improving but working well—that we would come out of it any better than we went in?
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Bellavia Janet Ribeiro-Addy (Labour, Centre-left): As I expect we will not get an opportunity for Third Reading, I start by saying this: another day, and another attempt by the Government to ram through a Bill that puts the Executive and their agents above our laws I rise to speak to the amendments and new clauses in my name and those of other hon. Members—amendments that seek to protect our diverse communities, our trade unions and our right to political protest. In doing so, it is important that I correctly frame my contribution and make it clear that I, and others who oppose the Bill, completely understand the need for undercover operations, such as joining a proscribed organisation or selling or possessing drugs as a means to uncover the activities of organised criminals. Ministers have, however, failed to convince us why, unlike other countries, we have decided to legislate for such operations to include authorising criminal actions with no limits—even for the most heinous crimes—with no judicial oversight, and with power so heavily concentrated in the Executive Likewise, it is completely bizarre to suggest that the undercover policing inquiry that is due to start next month is irrelevant to this Bill. How can that be so when the inquiry will investigate whether crimes were committed by undercover police officers? The attempt to argue that in the course of such conduct—for example, coercing women into sexual relationships, and infiltrating and sabotaging campaigns and trade unions—no crimes were committed is surprising, to say the least, but to make such assertions before the evidence has begun to be heard, and to introduce legislation that will essentially green-light further such actions, is breathtaking Giving the legal go-ahead to such criminal behaviour in the future totally undermines attempts to secure justice for the past. Before I hear anybody say that that is irrelevant, I will point out that it is very relevant to many people and groups, such as the 14 trade unions that recently signed a statement and campaigning organisations including Reprieve, the Pat Finucane Centre, the Hillsborough and Orgreave truth and justice campaigns, the Blacklist Support Group, anti-racist groups and family campaigns for justice. Without question, I stand with them.
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): I recognise what the Minister says. The challenge is that we already know of children and vulnerable young people who have been in this position under that legislation, but the paramount needs of the child or vulnerable person have not always been at the forefront of the minds of those involved in these investigations What am I talking about? I am talking, for example, about a 17-year-old girl who was in a relationship where she was sexually exploited, but she continued in that relationship because it was beneficial to the police investigating the person she was in a relationship with. She ended up witnessing a murder and being party to destroying evidence about that murder. We would be responsible for the situation that she was in New clause 8 does not say that there will never be a circumstance in which we might work with children, but it does say that it is right to see them as children first and to have a second pair of eyes to uphold that principle. The Minister will tell me that that is written into the guidance, but the new clause puts it in the Bill so that it is beyond doubt that somebody would take responsibility for a vulnerable person’s welfare. It also extends to vulnerable people who might have been trafficked, for example—people who may not see themselves as vulnerable but who, we would recognise, could be exploited. It is right that we have that check and balance of the appropriate adult—somebody who looks at that vulnerable person and gives an alternative perspective on what is happening to them, independent of the investigation The Minister may say that he cannot accept the new clause in this format, but I ask him to look seriously at this issue and to ensure that when we pass necessary legislation to formalise such powers, we take a step back and see the person we might be drawing into criminality. These people are not all James Bond and can consent freely to being involved in criminal activity and then be held accountable by RIPA. Some of them will be very vulnerable people who need us in this place to stand beside them and ensure that their interests are protected and that they have an appropriate adult to act for them I hope the Minister will listen to the concern that has been expressed across the House—the new clause is signed by Members from across the House—and introduce that protection into the Bill so that we put it beyond doubt. The reality is that if it is just in a code of guidance, it will not always be followed. Let us send the message that children should be children, not child spies.
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Labor
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): As I said, I support what the Labour Front Bench is doing in making that proposal to the Government and I hope the Minister is able to give us some good news when he responds to the debate at the end of the Committee stage Amendments 9 and 10 are very clear on the legitimate and legal activities of trade unions, and that trade unions should be excluded, on the face of the Bill, from any such acts.
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): I will not, because I know other Members want to speak. I need to say just two more things and then I will finish Amendment 12, on involving the Investigatory Powers Commissioner within seven days of any criminal conduct authorisation order, is also very welcome, as is new clause 2, on an equality impact assessment. Finally, I want to pay tribute to the speech made by my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Stella Creasy) on children and young people. I hope very much that the Minister will address that issue in his closing comments and take up putting the guidance on the face of the Bill, as my hon. Friend suggests.
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Conor Patrick McGinn (Labour, Centre-left): It is a pleasure, as always, to follow the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry), and to speak with you in the Chair, Dame Rosie. I rise to speak to the amendments in my name and that of my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the Opposition and other honourable colleagues. As I said on Second Reading, my right hon. and learned Friend has made it clear that security is a top priority for the Labour party under his leadership. We will be robust in supporting the fight against terrorism and crime in all its forms. We consider it our first responsibility to keep this country, its citizens and our communities safe, and we are grateful to those in the police, the security services, the National Crime Agency and wider law enforcement. They put their own safety and lives at risk to protect us, and we will meet our duty to support them It is worth noting that, since 2017, 27 terror plots have been uncovered and attacks foiled, and last year covert human intelligence sources helped to disrupt 30 threats to life. That is the sobering context of the debate, so we acknowledge and understand the Bill’s purpose, and recognise the need to put on a statutory footing the activity of those working to disrupt some of the most vile crimes imaginable, including terrorism, the activities of violent drug gangs, serious and organised crime, and child sexual exploitation It cannot be right, for those we ask to undertake that work, for those who might be affected by it or indeed for society as a whole, that that work continues in the shadows, and without boundaries and safeguards. In that vein, our amendment 7 seeks to ensure that the granting of criminal conduct authorisations may not take place until a warrant has been issued by a judge. We believe that it would provide reassurance to have independent judicial oversight of that process.