argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Transportation
Janet Jessica Daby (Labour, Centre-left): A constituent of mine who was blind tragically died last year when he fell in front of a train owing to a lack of safety measures, a lack of audio announcements and a lack of tactile paving on the platform. I know that the Government have plans for tactile paving, although they are unclear at the moment, but while we are waiting for this to happen, will the Minister commit to introducing audio announcements, which provide safety information at railway stations, as a matter of urgency to keep people safe and to prevent another person from losing their life?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Environment
Jeffrey Smith (Labour, Centre-left): Experts have warned that the carbon impact of the Government’s £27 billion roadbuilding programme could be around 100 times greater than the official Government estimates. Why will the Government not reassure us by committing to a comprehensive environmental impact assessment of the plans?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Transportation
Catherine Jane Smith (Labour, Centre-left): Ending financial support before demand has returned could leave bus and light rail operators facing a cliff edge. What plans do the Government have to ensure a smooth recovery for operators, such as Blackpool Transport, so that they can expand their timetables on routes such as the 2C, which runs through to Knott End-on-Sea via many other villages?
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
Rachael Helen Maskell (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way. I have been crunching the numbers. If we look at our trade deficit, we see that this agreement will bring in just £300,000 a day in exports compared with the £11 million a day we are losing in our deal with the EU. Should her efforts not be put towards ensuring that the deal is comprehensive so that we can trade across the channel, in view of the carbon impact of trading across the world?
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): I hear what the hon. Gentleman says, but it is palpable nonsense. We can have whatever standards we want in our own country, but if we are allowing those standards to be undermined by cheap imports that are made to different standards, we are essentially saying to our producers or our farmers, "You can keep our standards and you can go out of business." Frankly, every other country in the world negotiates trade agreements in the interests of that country, but at the moment this country seems to be negotiating trade agreements in order to prove a political point, and that political point is that Brexit works. Frankly, I think that we should be putting our country’s interests first and foremost, rather than petty point-scoring. This is very dangerous behaviour.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend makes a good point that Ministers should remember a little more actively The Government are joining the agreement with no ambition to improve its deficiencies, no attempt to deal with its threats and no effort to make it work in Britain’s interests. The trouble is that, when someone goes into a negotiation looking as if they are willing to accept anything in the deal, they come across to the other party as if they will do anything to get it. That brings me to the second quote, by the Secretary of State’s Australian counterpart, Dan Tehan. He said of the recent negotiations: "We’ve been very clear with the UK that… they’ll need a gold standard FTA with us if they’re going to have a realistic chance of joining the CPTPP" because "We have a very large say in what accession looks like" There it is: the man the Secretary of State threatened with an uncomfortable chair ended up holding her over a barrel Let us look at the consequences. As the price for UK access to the CPTPP and the 0.017% that will be added to GDP, the Secretary of State was willing to accept every single demand from Australia when it came to tariff-free, quota-free access for their cheap and cruelly produced meat.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Agriculture
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister says, "Oh! Oh!" Does he know what mulesing is? I suggest that he finds out, then looks us in the eye and tells us whether there are cruel practices in Australia No wonder Dan Tehan said that the Austalian National Farmers Federation was "over the moon" when he told them about the deal he had struck, while farmers up and down Britain curse it as a betrayal. Kit Papworth is the director of a farm business in Norfolk—perhaps he is a constituent of the Secretary of State’s. He said: "The deal is an absolute dereliction of everything that farmers have been promised… It is farmers being sold down the river once again… while agriculture… is being left… to die."
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Agriculture
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): I thought it was surprising that we did not hear more from Secretary of State, as a former EFRA Secretary, about farming standards. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the concerns that she has so eloquently expressed make it all the more important that we have proper scrutiny of the deal and not something that just rubber-stamps it at the last minute?
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): That is absolutely right. I saw an article in The Daily Telegraph this week by Jeremy Warner, which said, "It is vitally important that FTAs are pursued in a transparent and accountable manner that takes fully on board the interests, fears and concerns of domestic constituencies and affected sectors. The battle for free trade needs to be won as much at home as abroad." That is why we need to know whether we will get a proper debate and votes in this place. The Secretary of State has said nothing about whether Parliament will get a vote either on the negotiating objectives or on a deal at the end of the day.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: International Affairs
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): I am about to finish so I will not give way again I was talking about the importance of negotiating a deal where there would be specific demands and where there would be carve-outs. All those things may take more time than the Secretary of State would like and it may be a harder negotiation than those she is used to, but none of that should matter when what we are trying to do is get what is best for Britain.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
John Francis Spellar (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. Gentleman knows that I am very supportive of trade and trade agreements. Equally, I was rather surprised by his response to the hon. Member for Dudley North (Marco Longhi). Should we not be encouraging people to buy white vans made in Luton, and trying to ensure that St George’s flags are made and sold in the United Kingdom?
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: International Affairs
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, who is making a very interesting speech. Can I just ask him to look again at page 65 of the document? He cited the figure as 0.08%, but it is much lower, because the 0.08% includes Malaysia joining, and Malaysia has made it perfectly clear that it is very much having cold feet because of the ISDS provisions.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
Emily Thornberry (Labour, Centre-left): The points that the hon. Gentleman is making are very important, and Government Members ought to listen to them carefully. Quite a lot has been made of the statistic of a 65% increase in trade projected for this region by 2030, but on close examination of the document, is it not right that that projected increase in trade is one that Government figures show would happen irrespective of whether the UK joins the CPTPP?
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Foreign Trade
John Francis Spellar (Labour, Centre-left): I am a strong believer in free trade—I think it is a very good idea. However, the priority has to be the terms of the deal, not just the fact of doing a deal. It is the same as in business: too often, for the advisers, the lawyers and often even the chief executives, it is doing the deal that matters, but for the business and its workers it is the terms of the deal that matter. This is also about Government managing the follow-through. Let us be clear: one reason why free trade has a bad name in this country and in the United States, but particularly here, is that it has become a free-for-all. For the British Government, we buy trains, boats, military planes, ambulances, police cars and so on from anywhere in the world. No other country behaves like that. That is about decisions of Ministers. Frankly, unless Ministers develop some backbone and start to instruct their civil servants to support British industry, trade will continue to be mired in controversy in this country That is a great shame, because trade has made a transformation in the lives of hundreds of million—probably billions—of people around the world, particularly in China and Asia. It has raised living standards and aspirations. Barriers to trade, financial, physical or administrative, reduce living standards, as we are finding out and as a number of colleagues have mentioned. When talking about trade, we should remember that we have a massive trade deficit with the EU, which is why it should be negotiating more realistically with us—our Ministers should not be grandstanding, and should also be negotiating realistically with the EU. We also have to recognise that all change comes with associated costs and disruption. Look at the industrial revolution, the agricultural revolution and the corn laws in this country, which caused massive issues. We should learn the lessons of history and look at how we manage the transition, but that will require an active role for the Government; I know that is against their ideology, but it is absolutely necessary in order to deal with this fast-changing world Finally, there are a lot of problems all around the world with the unequal distribution of income arising from change, and particularly from the current technological revolution. The best way to deal with it is to support workers’ rights in these agreements and support trade union rights and free trade unions. Joe Biden has said that very clearly, but the message has to get through to our Government. There is a new sheriff in town in Washington, and we ought to be supporting him in backing workers’ rights around the world.
UK Defence Spending — House of Commons, 2021-06-24
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Francis Spellar (Labour, Centre-left): Interestingly, in 2008, when the global financial crisis hit, the ratio of debt to national product was less than it was when we came to office in 1997, and in the meantime we built the schools, the hospitals and the infrastructure that the Conservative Government had lamentably failed to build.
Gigabit Broadband — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Technology
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): I congratulate the Minister on retaining his position and welcome the new Secretary of State to hers. The Minister’s is a wide-ranging and critical role, not least because we need our broadband. Parliament, our businesses, our students, our economy and our social lives depend on it—but it is another broken promise. Full fibre by 2025 was the Prime Minister’s pledge, and the 2020 Budget set aside £5 billion to deliver it. Will the Minister confirm that only £1.2 billion of that £5 billion is planned to be spent by 2025 and that, far from full fibre, we will not even get affordable broadband? According to Ofcom, more than 2 million households find it hard to afford broadband, yet the Government are slashing broadband price controls, slashing the broadband budget, slashing universal credit support, and slashing gigabit targets. When will we get the broadband we need?
Fraudulent Online Advertisements — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Technology
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): Paid-for scam adverts are rife online, and it is not unusual for people to lose their entire life savings to them. The Prime Minister told the Liaison Committee in July that "one of the key objectives of the Online Safety Bill is to tackle online fraud," but the Bill as drafted does not cover paid-for scam adverts at all. I am pleased that the prelegislative scrutiny Committee is going to take a look at this, but will the Minister review the Department’s currently indefensible position? We cannot wait years for the other process that he referred to to work its way through the system.
Fraudulent Online Advertisements — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Joanna Meriel Stevens (Labour, Centre-left): May I, too, extend a warm welcome to the new Secretary of State and the new Minister? I hope that, as Digital Secretary, she has changed her parliamentary password Online fraud is a growing goldmine for fraudsters and online child abuse is a growing goldmine for paedophiles. Latest figures from the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and the Internet Watch Foundation show a 70% increase in sexual communication offences with children, and a 77% increase in self-generated child sexual abuse material. Why are the Government still stubbornly and inexplicably refusing Labour’s call and the NSPCC’s call for the immediate implementation in the online safety Bill of personal criminal liability for senior tech executives whose actions consistently and significantly put children at risk? We already have such a legal regime that works in financial services and in health and safety. There must be a compelling reason why the Government refuse to do the same to protect our children online. Can the Minister tell us what it is?
Public Service Broadcasting — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Technology
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I admit I was hoping that the Secretary of State would answer this question so that I could say "from one red to another", although maybe not in the full range of meaning of that term. I am the secretary of the National Union of Journalists parliamentary group. NUJ members are concerned about the future of public broadcasting, because of the sale of Channel 4, because of the 25% cut that has already been incurred at the BBC and because of reports that the Government are considering refusing even an inflation-rate increase in the BBC licence fee. Will the Minister meet a delegation from the NUJ parliamentary group to discuss these concerns?
Effective and Accountable Justice — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Eleanor Claire Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): I welcome the Attorney General back to her place—it is good to see her—and thank the right hon. and learned Member for Northampton North (Michael Ellis) for all his work during her maternity leave The court backlog is at a record high, with victims waiting years for their day in court. The latest Government data reveals that in the year ending March 2021, a staggering 1 million victims of crime abandoned their case because they lost faith in the justice system. The CPS budget has been cut by 33% in real terms over the past decade. Ahead of the comprehensive spending review, what specifically will the Attorney General say to the Treasury? What does she say specifically to the millions of victims who have lost faith in the system?
Effective and Accountable Justice — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Law and Crime
Eleanor Claire Reeves (Labour, Centre-left): I have listened to what the Attorney General has said, but say to her that the criminal justice system is on its knees. In rape cases, 44% of victims are pulling out before their case gets to court. The latest Crown Prosecution Service data shows that it would take the Government 22 years to reach their own target of returning to 2016 rape prosecution levels—22 years! It is absolutely not good enough, and we see this Government repeatedly fail rape victims. Will the Attorney General tell me what she plans to do to ensure that the Government meet their target, or will she sit on her hands and oversee the further decriminalisation of rape?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Prime Minister for an advance copy of his statement. The recent events in Afghanistan show us how precarious international stability can be. New challenges can emerge and issues in faraway corners of the globe can quickly turn into threats at home, so Labour welcomes increased co-operation with our allies. Australia and America are two of our closest security partners. Sharing resources and intelligence with them and enhancing capabilities makes them safer, makes Britain safer, and makes the world safer The lesson of the past few weeks is that Britain must look after our most important relationships, or our influence and security quickly decline. Labour welcomes this announcement, but may I ask the Prime Minister to outline in a bit more detail what the agreement means in practice? The strategic review identified China as a "systemic competitor". China’s assertiveness does pose risks to UK interests in a secure Pacific region, in stable trading environments and in democracy and human rights. We need to deal with those risks, defend our values and defend our interests, but the same review also rightly stated that the UK must maintain a commercial relationship with China, and we must work with them on the defining global issues of the day, such as climate change and pandemic preparedness. Without diplomatic strategy and skill, those goals will come into conflict. So what plan does the Prime Minister have to ensure that this new arrangement increases, rather than decreases our ability to influence China In order to protect our security and interests, we also need to look after our broader alliances. NATO remains our most important strategic alliance. It is also the most successful, having delivered peace and security in Europe for three quarters of a century. Whatever the merits of an Indo-Pacific tilt, maintaining security in Europe must remain our primary objective. Will the Prime Minister guarantee that the arrangement will not see resources redirected from Europe and the high north to the Pacific? Will he also guarantee that the arrangement will strengthen rather than weaken the NATO alliance, including our indispensable bilateral relationship with France? We are also in the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing arrangements with Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the US, which is vital to our security. Will the Prime Minister assure the House that this new trilateral arrangement will not weaken our intelligence capabilities by producing a two-tier Five Eyes operation Finally, the arrangement clearly brings potential economic opportunities for Britain. We need the well-paid, high-skilled jobs that the defence industry provides in every corner of Britain. The Prime Minister said that the project will create hundreds of skilled jobs. Will he give more detail on what he has done to ensure that Britain gets its fair share of any contracts that come out of the arrangements? What will he do to ensure that no region or nation in Britain misses out on any job opportunities that the arrangement may bring?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: International Affairs
Janet Jessica Daby (Labour, Centre-left): It is important that we maintain a diplomatic dialogue with China. Without it, solving some of the world’s greatest challenges, such as climate change, will not be achievable. Will the Prime Minister tell the House what is being done to increase our influence with China, and what impact this alliance might have on COP26 negotiations later in the year?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: International Affairs
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Maintaining and strengthening our alliances is now more important than ever. I welcome today’s announcement, but can the Prime Minister answer the question posed by the Leader of the Opposition, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), which was how this trilateral agreement sits with our Five Eyes relationships, and whether it will strengthen them and not weaken them?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: International Affairs
Rachael Helen Maskell (Labour, Centre-left): The human rights atrocities against the Uyghur people in China have yet to abate. They continue with such brutality. While co-operation is welcome, how will this new strategy make protecting human rights more possible since escalation of operations can have a chilling impact on diplomacy?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Labor
Ruth Lorraine Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I have listened very carefully to the Prime Minister’s statement. He mentioned the new well-paid jobs, which we all welcome, and all countries of the UK, but he did not mention Wales. Will he tell me why Wales has been left out of this jobs fest?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: International Affairs
Anthony Joseph Lloyd (Labour, Centre-left): Obviously we have an interest in maintaining a peaceful region in the Indo-Pacific, so I welcome this, but will the Prime Minister make something clear? He has described the agreement as being essentially about technological transfer, not about a major commitment of military assets. Can he guarantee that that is where we are going, and that no overstretch will be involved as a result of this agreement?
AUKUS — House of Commons, 2021-09-16
Topic: Labor
Alexandra Mary Davies-Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I am pleased to hear the Prime Minister’s commitment to Welsh workers and that they will be eligible for these opportunities, because workers in Pontypridd have already lost their jobs at BA in Llantrisant and GE in Nantgarw. I urge the Prime Minister to meet the leaders of the devolved nations, because he clearly needs a constitutional lesson. Wales is not a principality; it is a country—a country that has been forgotten by this Westminster Government. Will he commit to meeting them to look at contract opportunities for Welsh workers?