argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Prisoners (Disclosure of Information About Victims) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-06
Topic: Law and Crime
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I shall keep my remarks very short, but I want to say a few things in the cross-party spirit of the Bill. My remarks became even shorter after the Minister contacted me this morning and explained exactly the concessions that the Government are making. I am very grateful for that. I also pay tribute to the campaigners and Members of this House who have ensured that this important change in the law will hopefully come into force very soon, making life a lot better and more bearable for victims’ families, who have gone through traumatic experiences already The Liberal Democrats welcome the Bill, which will hopefully bring much needed justice for the families of victims. I sincerely hope that this legislation will mean that far fewer families find themselves in the awful position of not knowing what has happened after a loved one becomes a victim of a heinous crime The most important issue, which is at the core of the Bill, is improving communication, disclosure and open decision making. The parole function needs to make sure that the views of victims’ families are an essential part of that function. As we just heard, there are too many examples of a victim’s family finding out the result of a parole hearing only through media reports or online. I do not doubt that everyone in the House wants to ensure that our justice system does better to support victims. Parole Board cases are of great significance to victims’ families. They must have the right to know what is happening and to have their say—a meaningful say. The issue we are debating, which arises from the Lords amendment—much of that has already been discussed—is effective communication with victims’ families. That is currently done through the probation service. The Lords amendment would require the Parole Board to provide the essential and meaningful communication with victims’ families. I understand that the Government are offering not to amend this essential part of the Bill, but to improve the probation service to a point where justice is done for the families of victims The Government do, however, agree with part of the Lords amendment and have already been running a pilot for opt-out systems so that families can have regular updates, and they intend to lay a statutory instrument under the negative resolution procedure at the beginning of the new year, in line with the new victims code. All that is very welcome. We have also heard that the Government are committing to more contact between the Prisons Minister and the Victims’ Commissioner. Again, that is very welcome The proof of those concessions, however, will be in their effectiveness, and we will need to see how effective the system is once it is up and running. My main request is for a proper review of whether the new arrangements have the required outcome of giving the families of victims of terrible crimes the justice that they deserve, and minimising the trauma that families go through.
Carbon Emissions: Aviation — House of Commons, 2020-10-22
Topic: Energy
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): We all appreciate that the aviation industry is under immense pressure, and we want to see it recover through covid-19, but will the Government ensure that part of the support and encouragement for the aviation industry is tied to those developments of fuels, and that the UK oil and gas industry is also involved in finding alternative fuels?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-22
Topic: Transportation
Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): In normal times, millions of people from outside London use our transport system here in London, so in order to help keep TfL afloat, does the Secretary of State think it is fair to slap a transport tax on pensioners in Whitton and Hampton in my constituency in order to subsidise commuters from Welwyn and Hatfield in his constituency?
Covid-19: Economy Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-22
Topic: Macroeconomics
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): While I appreciate yet another partial U-turn from the Chancellor, what the country needs now more than anything is leadership, clarity and confidence that the Government are in control rather than this constant reaction and a patchwork with every hallmark of having been written on the back of a cigarette packet that we are getting from this Government. I plead with the Chancellor to consider going the whole way and keep the job retention scheme going after the end of October, let the devolved nations know what consequentials they will have—they need to plan as well—and give the country what he promised. He said he would do whatever it takes; this is not it.
Covid-19: Disparate Impact — House of Commons, 2020-10-22
Topic: Social Welfare
Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I welcome the Minister’s acknowledgement early on in her statement of the disproportionate impact of covid on disabled people. She said that work is ongoing and there will be future reports, but I hope she will agree that we need urgent action. She will know that disabled people are 11 times more likely to die from coronavirus. We have also heard very disturbing reports of "do not resuscitate" orders being put in place, particularly for those with learning difficulties, without consultation with their families. I recognise that the Care Quality Commission is investigating this, but will she commit to ending this injustice urgently?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-12
Topic: Education
Alexander Morrison Carmichael (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Some 1.7 million children across the whole of the United Kingdom have no access to a desktop, laptop or tablet devices for learning while away from school. That is the scale of the digital divide in this country. The impact of that will be with us for some years to come. What are Ministers doing, along with their colleagues in the devolved Administrations, to ensure that we close that gap once and for all?
Covid-19 Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Prime Minister, we are all disappointed and distressed that we are back where we were in March in many ways. The Prime Minister says that he wants to keep the economy going, but for many businesses and individuals, particularly the clinically vulnerable, that will be impossible. Will the Prime Minister and Chancellor end this chop and change, knee-jerk reaction approach that we have seen in recent days and extend the job retention scheme and furlough until next June so that businesses and individuals can have certainty and clarity about the support they will get, which will enable them to plan their way through this crisis?
Agriculture Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-12
Topic: Agriculture
Timothy James Farron (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I want to be very clear: the concerns that people have about the Bill and the Government’s decision not to accept the amendment are not about the quality of food. We understand that the product is not a danger. What we are concerned about is the production and the impact on the producer. If we undermine animal welfare and environmental standards, we may well have quality food to eat but we will damage our farmers and the integrity of our farming industry in the process.
Agriculture Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-12
Topic: Agriculture
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): This Bill could well be among the most significant pieces of legislation that we debate in this Parliament. It covers our farming practices, environmental protections and food supply chains. If the food shortages in supermarkets at the beginning of lockdown have taught us anything, it is the importance of food security and traceability. Our constituents know this. Recent polling by Which? shows 95% support for maintaining existing food standards, and over 1 million people have now signed the NFU’s petition—yes, the NFU: that radical and dangerous organisation, according to the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Bill Wiggin)—calling for food standards to be enshrined in law The most frequently raised issue recently by Bath constituents has been the Agriculture Bill. They want reassurances about the quality of the food they eat. They care about animal welfare standards and environmental protections. They want to know that British farmers will not be undercut by cheaper, lower quality products from countries with fewer regulations. Like many others, I have been supporting local businesses during lockdown. We are lucky in Bath to have an excellent supply of locally produced food from Somerset, and it will be British families like these who will be left unsupported This pandemic has also underlined the importance of healthy eating and good nutrition for our general health and wellbeing, yet we risk exposing hundreds of thousands of families to low-quality food, undermining the Government’s own obesity strategy. We must be mindful, too, of the agricultural sector’s role in getting to net zero. Lower food standards encourage poor production practices, and the result is massive damage to the environment. Unless these standards are legally enshrined, the risk remains that this Government will compromise on environmental protections and food and welfare standards, as they head out in a desperate search for trade deals after Brexit. Just last week, the US Agriculture Secretary said: "We absolutely will not agree to policies that restrict our methods of production to any other standards outside of this country"— the US. How can we ask our constituents to rely on nothing more than ministerial assurances? The Government argue that enshrining food standards in the Bill would undermine trade negotiations. That is not true. This morning, the Future British Standards Coalition published its interim report, with evidence that it is possible to reject low food standard imports, remain WTO-compliant and still strike trade deals. The Government want Britain to be a global leader in trade. Why not be a leader that encourages trading partners to adopt higher standards? I urge Members across the House to support the Lords amendments, particularly amendment 16.
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-22
Topic: Agriculture
Sarah Jane Olney (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I entirely agree. I was going on to say that the Secretary of State also awards himself the power to vary the statutory requirements in the non-discrimination clause, such as on transportation and inspection of goods or regulation of the markets, in the same way. Is it not the case that, should the Secretary of State find that such requirements no longer suited the needs of English producers, he could change them, to the detriment of Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish producers, without the express consent of their Governments?
United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — House of Commons, 2020-09-22
Topic: Government Operations
Wendy Anne Chamberlain (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I rise to speak to new clause 9, which I have tabled with the support of my Liberal Democrat colleagues. During the Bill’s passage through the House, we have frequently heard from Ministers and the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Alexander Stafford), who is no longer in his place, that this is not a political Bill. Last Tuesday, the Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully) emphasised that in his wind-up. He said that he wanted "to put the Bill into context, so that we can see where it sits…This is an economic Bill".—[Official Report, 15 September 2020; Vol. 680, c. 263.] I simply disagree. I will leave to one side the fact that the Bill breaks international law. I am just talking about the sections of the Bill that are before us today, for which the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is responsible This is a political Bill because, at its heart, it is about the question of who decides, which is of huge constitutional importance. The powers that went to the European Community nearly 50 years ago are returning to a UK that has had, despite appearances, a constitutional makeover. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all now have devolved Governments, and that constitutes profound change. To expect that the responsibilities that are returning from Europe will map neatly back on to our new constitutional settlement is to live in the past Looking at some parts of the Bill, we have to wonder whether those drafting and proposing it truly understand what is devolved and what is reserved and the implications of that. We have heard from some Members today who have not previously engaged with this either. The Government clearly believe that the default position in relation to returning powers should be to Westminster, whereas the Scottish Government believe that it should be to Holyrood unless specifically reserved. I go back to what I said in relation to part 4 of the Bill last week. Breaching this divide means consensus, consultation and collaboration—a four nations approach, which has to be the root of all we do as a United Kingdom.
Full-fibre Broadband Network — House of Commons, 2020-10-14
Topic: Technology
Jamie Hume Stone (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I suspect that my question will come as no surprise. I represent one of the most remote parts of the UK, and far too many of my constituents simply cannot get decent connectivity. Could the Minister please share his experience and his know-how with the Scottish Government so that we can get this problem sorted out?
Electricity Generation: Local Suppliers — House of Commons, 2020-10-14
Topic: Energy
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Bath and North East Somerset Council is working closely with Bath and West Community Energy, and such partnerships are incredibly important for getting local buy-in. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that in order to get that local buy-in, this really has to work financially as well for the people?
Electricity Generation: Local Suppliers — House of Commons, 2020-10-14
Topic: Energy
Wendy Anne Chamberlain (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Members have talked about left-behind communities and the real desire for many communities to get involved. I want to mention those who are left out and how important it is that the community energy sector is inclusive. Right now, 4% of practitioners in the sector are black, Asian and minority ethnic. Will the hon. Member join me in paying tribute to the organisation Power for People, which is working to ensure that it represents those groups that are currently under-represented in the sector?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-11-12
Topic: Education
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): We need to have inclusive education across society, including the teaching of the less glorious parts of our history, that extends beyond Black History Month. Memorial 2007 is campaigning for an enslaved Africans memorial to the victims of the transatlantic slave trade and slavery, to ensure that present and future generations learn about this part of our history. Will the Minister meet me and campaigners to discuss how we work together to build this important memorial?
Hong Kong — House of Commons, 2020-11-12
Topic: International Affairs
Layla Michelle Moran (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question, and I thank the Minister for his words. Today I have a very simple question. What are the Government going to do as "one country, two systems" disappears before our eyes? The disqualification of pro-democracy lawmakers from the Legislative Council of Hong Kong means it has effectively been reduced to a rubber-stamp Parliament and democracy on the peninsula is now in mortal peril. Although the previous actions of this Government are to be commended, it is time to do more. Indeed, the Foreign Secretary told the House in July that the Government "will hold China to its international obligations."—[Official Report, 20 July 2020; Vol. 678, c. 1832.] Yet here we are again. Through these actions, the Chinese Government are making a mockery of the joint declaration. I ask the Minister what legal routes to defend the joint declaration are being considered. What has the Minister done to co-ordinate a response with our allies internationally, in particular the USA, including President-elect Biden, and the European Union? Will the UK finally impose Magnitsky-style sanctions on those individuals in Hong Kong and China who are responsible for human rights abuses, and, if not that model, will he look at a sanctions register, as used by the US The BNO citizenship scheme excludes those who need it, particularly young people who have so bravely protested in the best traditions of democracy. We must protect them. The estimated true cost for a Hongkonger to come here for five years is £3,000, and that is before living costs. Many simply cannot afford it. Will the Minister confirm how many applications have been made under the scheme and how many have been granted? Will he consider introducing a bursary scheme for those unable to pay, and will he introduce a lifeboat policy for all Hong Kong citizens regardless of age and, if not, will he agree to meet me to discuss this matter further In 1996, John Major underlined our commitment to Hong Kong when he said: "If there were to be any suggestion of a breach of the Joint Declaration we would have a duty to pursue every legal and other avenue available to us." He concluded: "Hong Kong will never have to walk alone." It is time for actions, not just words. It is time to make good on our promise.
Hong Kong — House of Commons, 2020-11-12
Topic: International Affairs
Alexander Morrison Carmichael (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I listened to the answer that the Minister gave to the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). I can understand the logic of it and I can understand his caution, but, in practical terms, the idea that the likes of Carrie Lam might at some stage be subject to Magnitsky sanctions is something for which we may now have lost that element of surprise. Therefore, the practical consequences of the Government’s position are probably not that significant, but the political consequences of a more robust answer to the hon. right Gentleman and others could be immense, especially if we were to pursue this through our membership of the UN Human Rights Council, to which we have now been elected for the next two years. What will the Minister do with that very useful tool?
Hong Kong — House of Commons, 2020-11-12
Topic: International Affairs
Wera Benedicta Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): Extending the right to apply for BNO status has been very welcome and indeed is a lifeline to many Hongkongers. However, the CCP is likely to do its utmost to obstruct the process. Will the Government consider giving diplomatic assistance to legitimate applicants who are still in the process of applying but might get arrested under the draconian new security laws?
Her Majesty the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee — House of Commons, 2020-11-12
Topic: Environment
Jamie Hume Stone (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): The platinum jubilee is a wonderful prospect and we know that the Queen loves Scotland. May I say, as a Scottish MP, that that love is deeply reciprocated? I suggest to the Secretary of State that one way to mark the jubilee would be to give each and every school the length and breadth of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland a small seedling tree. Irish yews could be given to schools in Northern Ireland, Scots pines in Scotland, English oaks in England and Welsh oaks—the sessile oak—in Wales. The pupils could plant and nurture these trees as a long-term project and it would teach them about the environment, our native species and what climate change and global warming is all about. It would be their contribution to helping the environment of our country.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-09-03
Topic: Foreign Trade
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): We have heard warm words today from the Government Benches about cheese and the food and drink industry, yet we need reassurances in Scotland more than just warm words about trade deals. The Scotch whisky industry has lost a third of its exports to the United States since the 25% tariff was introduced. What are the Government actually doing to support the industry, which is vital not only to my constituency but to just about every constituency in Scotland?
Continuity Trade Agreements: Parliamentary Scrutiny — House of Commons, 2020-11-17
Topic: International Affairs
Christine Anne Jardine (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): I am afraid I cannot share the relief of the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Dehenna Davison) that we have a Conservative Government, because as we move closer to the end of the transition period, my constituents, and constituents and businesspeople all over this country, are increasingly worried about their inability to secure the deals and the clarity needed. As a Scot, I am not a nationalist, so my views cannot be dismissed as wanting to undermine the interests of Scotland in the United Kingdom, so can the Minister give us some indication of where these deals are going to come from, how they will be settled and what scrutiny they will have in this place?
Continuity Trade Agreements: Parliamentary Scrutiny — House of Commons, 2020-11-17
Topic: Foreign Trade
Wendy Anne Chamberlain (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): While the Department for International Trade attempts to strike trade deals, its counterparts in the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy are using the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill to expand the powers of the Competition and Markets Authority. There is a growing concern that the Office for the Internal Market could be used to challenge the devolved Administrations by, for instance, American investors with an interest in a trade deal. Can the Minister confirm whether he or the Secretary of State have had any discussions with their foreign counterparts over the role of the expanded CMA and the Office for the Internal Market?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2020-11-17
Topic: International Affairs
Layla Michelle Moran (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am grateful for the opportunity to make this point of order on the important matter of the country’s international development budget. It is unacceptable that we have heard in the media this morning that the Government are seriously giving consideration to reducing that budget from 0.7% to 0.5% of gross national income. The UK’s development spending has been the difference between life and death for countless vulnerable people across the world. I seek your guidance, because surely it is unacceptable that, yet again, we are hearing such things in the media as opposed to the Government coming to this House so that we can have a proper debate. If this is going to happen, what options are open to me and other Members to try to rectify the situation and quickly get clarity from the Government? Surely they would have to bring a Bill to the House to reverse this provision.