argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Local Government Finance — House of Commons, 2017-02-22
Topic: Housing
Gareth Thomas (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend has made a good point. That is all the more reason for continuing to hold the Government to account for their decision to axe revenue support grant in full under the Local Government Finance Bill What this settlement also does not address are the huge pressures that councils face as a result of rising homelessness and temporary accommodation costs, as well as rapidly increasing children’s social care costs. Rough-sleeping rates fell to historical lows under Labour; they have more than doubled since 2010. The number of social homes being built is at the lowest level on record. With more than 1 million people on social housing waiting lists, councils’ spending on housing families in temporary accommodation has gone up by 46%. Instead, Ministers are taking money away from councils through the new homes bonus. Ministers sing the praises of the new multi-year settlement as a way to give local government certainty, and then in their very first year make a late switch, leaving many councils with an unplanned gap in their budgets No area of England has been spared from cuts to services. The doors have shut on libraries, day centres and care homes. Bus services, leisure centres and youth centres have all closed or had their hours and range of services restricted. Women’s refuges have been axed, funding and contracts for local charities taken away. Advice services have gone. Investment in parks and street cleaning has been sharply reduced. All these services and others, treasured by local communities, or vital lifelines for vulnerable residents, have been cut This funding settlement will mean that the people of England are left with worse public services. It will deepen the divide between those parts of the country that are well-off and those that rank highest for deprivation. It is a settlement that will not remotely begin to tackle the social care crisis, and it will hit the pockets of those struggling to balance their budgets particularly hard. And it does not tackle the long-term problems facing councils from an increasing dependence on business rates. England deserves better, and that is why we will be voting against this report.
Local Government Finance — House of Commons, 2017-02-22
Topic: Domestic Commerce
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): I agree with a lot of what the right hon. Lady is saying. On average, small businesses with fewer than 10 employees could face an increase in rates of around £17,000 a year. Now, that is a lot of money and it could put many small businesses, shops in particular, out of business.
Defence Spending — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): The UK was a central part of the European forces in Bosnia, Althea, and in the Mediterranean, Atalanta. Does this mean that the Government will be committing to remain part of such European forces in the future, after we have left the European Union?
G20 — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Immigration
Keith Anthony Vaz (Labour, Centre-left): May I press the Prime Minister on the issue of migration and displacement, which affects 65 million people worldwide? She will know that, since 1 January, 82,800 people have risked their lives trying to cross the Mediterranean, and that 2,000 have died. The G20 leaders run 84% of the economy of the world. Apart from the £55 million that is going to Tanzania, what other resources are being given to deal with this catastrophic problem?
G20 — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Graham Peter Jones (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister said in her statement that, "women and children are being enslaved, forced into hard labour, raped, beaten and passed from abuser to abuser for profit." Does she agree that that is no more true than when it comes to the depravity of child prostitution in India? Did she raise that issue with Prime Minister Modi?
G20 — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kelvin Peter Hopkins (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister will recall that the recently deceased Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership would have included grotesque provisions allowing private global corporations to prosecute legitimate democratic Governments. Will she reject any future trade deal that includes such provisions?
G20 — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Civil Rights
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): Not all G20 countries have made the same sort of progress that we have in this country in relation to racist and discriminatory language. Was that an issue that she discussed with the G20 leaders, and does she agree that, where it happens, organisations should take decisive and swift action?
G20 — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): I welcome the Prime Minister’s indication that she wants to coax the United States back into the Paris agreement. Will she consider strengthening her negotiating hand by suggesting to President Trump that there will be no negotiations on a free trade deal until they come back into the agreement, or is securing a free trade deal with the United States more important than securing the future of the planet?
Export Licensing: High Court Judgment — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrew Francis Slaughter (Labour, Centre-left): May I ask the Secretary of State, as he continues to promote the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia, what regard his Government have to the fact that 157 people were executed there last year, including minors, and that four young men who were arrested as minors, Dawoud al-Marhoon, Abdullah al-Zaher, Ali al-Nimr and Abdulkareem al-Hawaj, remain at imminent risk of execution by crucifixion?
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Other
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the right hon. Gentleman for being so quick to take an intervention. May I suggest that he is being a little Panglossian and positive in his approach? As constituency MPs, we receive quite a number of complaints, and yet the grin on his face suggests quite the opposite.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): Will the hon. Lady to let me answer the Minister’s intervention before I take another I am grateful to hear that from the Minister, and we will hold the Government to account to ensure that that intervention takes place. As he knows, we are all here to ensure that improvements happen, and if he has given a commitment from the Dispatch Box that he will use his ministerial position to ensure that the market is not a free-for-all and that the Government will ensure those improvements in rural areas, for rural businesses and consumers, the Opposition will support him.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman will have to sit down for a second. We cannot both be on our feet. I have given a lot of leeway, but I do not want to get too involved in 4G, 5G, and telecommunications being passed down motorways and railways, as they have absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing. I know that you have been asked to filibuster, but do not worry because we have so many more speakers to come and you might deprive them. Come on, Mr Jayawardena.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I have a slight problem. I did not expect to have to bring in a time limit—[Interruption.] Seriously. I do not want to have to introduce a time limit, but we have the summing up in about an hour and there are still five speakers to come, so can we aim at around 12 minutes? If this continues, two speakers will drop off the end, and I certainly would not want that to happen when Members have been sitting here all day. I want to help Members.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I will give you an extra lesson—[Interruption.] You will have to take your seat for a second, though. You might be informing the nation, but it has to be on the subject we are discussing, otherwise you are out of order.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Don’t worry—I can help you. I am very bothered about the length of time and the number of speakers I am trying to get in, so if we can concentrate on the bolts of what it is about, it will be much easier to get everybody in to speak. The last thing I want to do is not get you in to speak, seeing as you have sat here all day. So I think it is better if I can help the House move along in the area I think we need to discuss. To go back and talk about 3G over 4G is not relevant to today’s debate.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Before I call Mr Tomlinson, I want to help him by saying that he might want to take a few pages out of his speech. If hon. Members keep to 10 minutes each, they will all get a chance to speak.
Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-10
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): This is an important point, which I have raised in points of order and through other mechanisms in the past week or so. Will the Minister clarify that it is still the Government’s intention to proceed with the measures that were in the Local Government Finance Bill relating to the local retention of business rates, on the same timetable set out, with the changes to the revenue support grant?
Mayflower Pilgrims — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on celebrating the 400th anniversary of the Mayflower pilgrims in 2020 in the UK and abroad.
John Mann (Labour, Centre-left): I thought the Prime Minister wanted help from Opposition Members, and here I am, available—the re-elected co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for the Mayflower pilgrims—unlike Olly, who now has other pursuits to pursue. I was prepared to offer my services to take on that role, rather than a non-parliamentarian. Nevertheless, can the good people of Bassetlaw expect support from this Government, as promised by George Osborne, to properly celebrate the fact that the pilgrims and their legacy—including the modern United States—originated in Bassetlaw?
Taylor Review: Working Practices — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has welcomed the report. Is she in a position to accept any of its specific recommendations today? Can she tell us when there will be legislation to implement at least something in it, or is this all going to be batted off into the long grass?
Taylor Review: Working Practices — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Mixed Topics
Teresa Pearce (Labour, Centre-left): Speaking at the launch this morning, Mr Taylor suggested that traditional cash-economy workers such as window cleaners could use an app to collect money and declare directly to Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, so why does Uber, which has the most cutting-edge, fully automated app, not seem to declare the payments it makes to drivers directly to HMRC or to collect the national insurance numbers of drivers? Will the Minister strongly suggest that it does so?
Taylor Review: Working Practices — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Civil Rights
Katherine Anne Green (Labour, Centre-left): Matthew Taylor urges the Government to consider reducing tribunal fees. May I urge the Minister to go further, particularly in relation to pregnancy discrimination? Get on with abolishing them, and extend the period during which a case can be brought before a tribunal, because a period of pregnancy and maternity is a busy time when people are unlikely to be thinking about a court case.
Contaminated Blood — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Ian Austin (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is completely right to thank all those people, but there is one person missing from that list: herself. The whole House should thank her for her tireless work over the past seven years on this absolutely brilliant campaign. This shows how Parliament should work: a constituent raised the issue with her; she campaigned on it non-stop; she was not fobbed off; she pursued it doggedly; and she has played a huge role in bringing us to this point. Last night, I had a load of emails from constituents who have been affected by this scandal, and I want to say how grateful they are to my hon. Friend for the work that she has done.
Contaminated Blood — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Just like every other Member, I have only seen what is out in the media, and I understand that there will be a consultation on the form of the inquiry. I am sure that the Minister will be able to help us in his contribution.
Contaminated Blood — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Mixed Topics
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Absolutely. The right hon. and learned Gentleman makes a good point and I will come on to that I do not need to remind the House of the damage that public disasters do to all those who are affected, as we know from the Hillsborough tragedy in 1989 and, more recently, the appalling fire at Grenfell Tower. Every public disaster of this kind is different: their causes differ; the victims suffer in different ways; and the measures necessary to support those affected, and their families, also differ. However, every victim has a fundamental right to one thing: answers. They deserve to be told what went wrong, why it went wrong, and who is responsible for what happened. The story of the injustice they have suffered needs to be set out and told to the wider public. Their voices need to be heard. Apologies, compensation and other forms of support are essential, but if their right to answers is not also satisfied, they will be denied true and meaningful justice.
Contaminated Blood — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Mixed Topics
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Those are important questions for any inquiry to address On today’s announcement, the Westminster leaders’ joint letter of 7 July provided a blueprint for how such an inquiry should be conducted. First, as with Hillsborough, there should be a commitment to secure full public disclosure of details related to this tragedy, through a process managed by the affected community. There should be a mechanism to ensure all public bodies involved in the scandal are compelled to give oral and written evidence to the inquiry. There need to be assurances that the inquiry will cover the role of American firms in providing blood factor concentrates to people with haemophilia. There should also be an investigation not just of the run-up to the scandal but of its aftermath. Finally, the inquiry has to address the allegations of criminal conduct. As I said earlier, I hope the Minister will also be able to help us with a timetable for the inquiry, as those affected have waited so long to get to this point.
Contaminated Blood — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Immigration
Albert Owen (Labour, Centre-left): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson) on her leadership on this issue. On the hon. Gentleman’s point about coming together, it is important for this issue to be considered at a UK level, because it predates devolution. It is important that the Minister—I thought he was going to speak second in the debate—works with the devolved Administrations and that any future compensation is provided at a UK level so that there are no second-class citizens in the United Kingdom.
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment 2, in page 1, line 13, at end insert— "(4) The Government must publish a review within one year of this Act receiving Royal Assent on the impact on UK consumers using EU-based companies affected by changes to consumer protection introduced by this section." This amendment requires the Government to review the impact of provisions under this section to ensure that they are not adversely affecting UK consumers using EU-based companies.
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): I will not give way We ask the Government to get the ball rolling within a year of the Bill receiving Royal Assent, but a regular review is also needed, particularly in the light of Brexit. Our amendment is supported by the Association of British Travel Agents and other travel organisations. Despite ministerial assurances, we want our amendment to be made to the Bill, so we will press it to a Division.
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. That is not a word we would use, and I am sure the hon. Lady can think of something much more pleasant. The Minister is a nice man, after all, and I do not believe he would mislead the House.
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister is a terribly generous chap, but his attempts to pacify the Opposition with his promise of a letter to ATIPAC simply are not enough. That does not cut the mustard, so we will push the amendment to a vote. Question put, That the amendment be made.
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. There is a lot of conversation. I really am struggling to hear, and I am not sure whether the mic is picking up this speech. Would hon. Members please have their conversations when they have left the Chamber?
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): We will press amendment 3 to a Division. We seek a commitment that the Minister gave in the Vehicle Technology and Aviation Bill Committee—that the Government would conduct a thorough impact assessment and consultation before implementing the power. Clause 2 relates to the Air Travel Trust, which is the legal vehicle that holds the money that is then used to refund consumers under ATOL protections. It gives the Secretary of State the power to define separate trust arrangements to reflect different market models, prefiguring some of the changes in the package holiday market mentioned by the Minister Amendment 3 would require the Government to undertake a full and proper review, and public consultation, before introducing any of the changes that would be enabled under the powers in clause 2. Unlike clause 1, clause 2 does not seem directly relevant to harmonising EU and UK regulations. Instead, it is a dormant power that the Government will retain in order to make considerable changes to ATOL, and particularly to the Air Travel Trust. That is where Brexit comes in because, were such changes to happen, they would most likely be in the event of the UK leaving the European Union During one of the VTAB Committee evidence sessions, Richard Moriarty of the Civil Aviation Authority—a trustee of the current Air Travel Trust—said that he recognised the possible merits of separating the trust to reflect the variations of products in the market. However, he explained that we simply are not there yet, and that it would be wrong for the Government to use the Bill as a means of making wholesale changes without due consultation. The Minister made it clear in a letter to my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Andy McDonald) that changes would be made only through the affirmative procedure, yet the Bill does not account for any further consultation as part of this measure The Government’s impact assessment explicitly states that it "does not consider proposals for ATOL reform, beyond what is required" in the package travel directive. It would therefore be rather inappropriate for the Minister to go beyond that, without providing assurances that proper consultation and scrutiny will take place if the Government are minded to go beyond changes that were already envisaged During the VTAB evidence session, Mr Moriarty said that he hoped the Government would "follow the practice that they have followed today: consult with us, consult the industry, do the impact assessment, and so on." Amendment 3 simply says that. It is fair and reasonable and would guarantee scrutiny of further changes that may come down the track regarding ATOL protection.
Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing Bill — House of Commons, 2017-07-11
Topic: Other
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister makes a fair enough point, but with respect, it has been a terrible waste of time debating this matter in the Committee of the whole House when it was previously dealt with in 45 minutes in Committee upstairs. For the sake of appearances, VTAB has been broken up into its component parts and is now being given undue time for debate in this Chamber.
Bilateral Relations: Poland — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Catherine McKinnell (Labour, Centre-left): In the wake of Brexit, I have been left deeply concerned by the rise in hate crime and the subsequent insecurity felt by our Polish communities. I was very saddened to read a report in a local newspaper of a Polish-born mother in the north-east saying that when she speaks Polish to her daughter, "I can’t guarantee I would feel safe." Will the Minister clarify what steps he is taking with his Polish counterparts to reassure Polish communities that hate crime is not acceptable and will not be tolerated in the UK?
Bilateral Relations: Poland — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Immigration
Khalid Mahmood (Labour, Centre-left): Has the Minister received the same representation as we have from the Polish and other European embassies on the difficulties that many EU nationals are having with the 85-page form that they have to complete in order to apply for permanent residency in the UK? Has he relayed those concerns to the Home Office? [Interruption.] The Secretary of State does not even know about it. In that case, will the Minister, the Secretary of State and perhaps my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), the shadow Secretary of State, accept my challenge and try to fill in the form and see how they get on?
Yazidi Captives: Daesh — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Helen Mary Jones (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman will know that when Yazidi women are released, they have great difficulty accessing the medical services—particularly the psychiatric services—that they need. Plane-loads of Yazidi women have been flown to Germany for treatment. Can Britain now do its bit and undertake to do the same thing?
Death Penalty: United Arab Emirates — House of Commons, 2017-03-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Fiona Margaret Mactaggart (Labour, Centre-left): Jennifer Dalquez is an overseas domestic worker working in the Emirates to provide for her two children in the Philippines. In a struggle with her employer, who was trying to rape her, she killed him, and she now faces either execution or a fine of 100 camels’ value, over $60,000, which she has no prospect of paying. What can the Minister do to ensure that this barbaric justice system comes into the 21st century and respects the human rights of people, especially overseas domestic workers?