argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): I think that my right hon. Friend is being too pessimistic. As I said earlier, the test will be whether at the end of five years we can look back and say that the Commission has delivered in practice what its words indicated at the start of its tenure. I completely accept that there is a real problem with the Commission’s working culture, which, to be fair, like many national Government Departments, tends to judge success by the output of new law and new regulation, rather than the quality of what is actually done on a number of core priorities I was pleased to note that the Commission confirmed this weekend that 73 of the measures proposed for withdrawal have now been formally withdrawn. By comparison, the 2014 work programme proposed 29 new initiatives and prioritised a further 26 measures for adoption, and in 2010 there were some 300 new measures proposed. This work programme is focused on fewer measures, and on measures that will encourage growth and jobs, deepen the single market, conclude trade agreements and improve regulation, freeing up business from unnecessary regulatory burdens. The Government welcome that new focus.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): I cannot agree with my right hon. Friend. Of the 73 proposals being withdrawn, 71 are either obsolete or have already been blocked by the Council. Of the 79 actions being withdrawn under REFIT, 58 are evaluations or studies, five are proposals to codify, two are proposals to simplify, one is a proposal for a simplified framework and two are proposals for an update or a review. There is only one that would reduce something, against 452 Commission proposals, less the 73 that are sitting on the table. He tells us that this is a great success for Europe. What would be failure?
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): Failure would be Europe failing to give priority to job creation, economic growth and competitiveness at a time when a horrifying number of people, particularly young people, are out of work in this continent and when European competitiveness is not only slipping behind that of the United States, but is at risk because of the global shift of economic power to Asia and Latin America. The answer to those economic challenges lies in Europe raising its game dramatically as far as competitiveness is concerned.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Foreign Trade
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): As I told my hon. Friend when I last gave evidence to his Committee, the Government take decisions collectively and it would not be right for me to go into detail about internal Government communications. I will come to the issues raised by the amendment shortly, but first I want to say more about the importance of the proposed work on economic affairs and competitiveness The United Kingdom has long argued for ambitious trade deals. The ongoing Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and EU-Japan negotiations could benefit this country annually by more than £15 billion, so the comprehensive stocktake of trade policy proposed by the Commission is welcome The EU’s greatest achievement—the single market—is still very far from complete, so we are pleased that the Commission plans to push liberalisation in sectors that could boost GDP the most, such as construction and professional services. We want EU legislation to enable the dynamic development of the future economy by supporting and not hindering a continent-wide digital single market. If that is done right, in a way that encourages the growth of online trade—both retail and business to business—it could generate €250 billion over the lifetime of this Commission We also support the Commission’s vision of a well-regulated and integrated capital markets union of all 28 member states that maximises the benefits of capital markets and non-bank financing for the real economy. Lord Hill’s recent Green Paper on the subject spelled out the approach he plans to take, and the Government will, of course, engage with his team as the policy is developed further We welcome the fact that the Commission intends to consider a range of approaches, and not just legislation, to develop Europe’s capital markets, and that much of that will be delivered through member state and industry action, rather than through EU-level law or regulation.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Alan Redwood (Conservative, Centre-right): Will the Minister comment on the investment programme, which is said to be significant? How much of it is a spending commitment by the European institutions from their levies on member states, and how much will be done by gearing and leverage through guarantees and loans?
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Energy
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): If I get the chance, I will give my right hon. Friend the exact figures at the end of the debate, but only a relatively small amount of the European fund for strategic investments—the so-called Juncker package—is derived from reallocating parts of the existing EU budget. The majority of the proposed €315 billion for the EFSI relies very much on private sector input on the basis of gearing Perhaps my right hon. Friend will be reassured to know that when I visited the European Investment Bank recently to discuss its approach to the programme, it was very firm in saying that it took very seriously its responsibility to its shareholders—the member states—and that it would exercise its responsibilities as a bank, that there would be due diligence, that it was not prepared simply to wave projects through on the basis that any sector or country deserved a particular slice, and that it would look at the real economic benefit that each proposal for capital investment offered to Europe as well as to the member state One of the sectors that we think could benefit from the EFSI is energy, where there is a need for work on interconnectors that would not only make more possible a genuine single internal market in European energy, but meet the strategic objective of trying to reduce European energy dependence on Russia. We think that the Commission communication on energy union is an important step towards not only strengthening Europe’s energy security, but decarbonising our economies and deepening the internal energy market.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): The challenge the Swiss Government face is that they have entered into a series of bilateral agreements with the European Union linking a number of different elements together. For example, in the Swiss bilateral treaties with the EU, access to some of the EU’s single market provisions is explicitly linked to accepting the principle of freedom of movement. At the moment, it is written into that package of bilateral treaties that if one is revoked or renounced, all of the agreements will fall by a certain deadline. That is the challenge the Swiss Government face following the referendum early last year. We remain in close touch with Switzerland, a friendly country, and we hope that we can find a satisfactory way forward.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Foreign Trade
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): If my hon. Friend will allow me, I am conscious that the debate is time limited, and I want to let other Members speak Before I conclude, I want to refer to the question of regulation. During his hearing in the European Parliament, Vice-President Timmermans pledged to conduct a review of pending legislation, which was completed in late 2014; to launch a revised inter-institutional agreement on better law-making in spring 2015; and to conduct a review of better regulation by October 2015 We are continuing to work with other member states to implement the recommendations of the Prime Minister’s business taskforce on EU regulation—the introduction of EU burden reduction targets, even greater use of lighter regimes and exemptions for small and medium-sized enterprises and micro-enterprises, and greater independence and powers for the Commission’s Impact Assessment Board Thirteen of the 30 recommendations of the Prime Minister’s taskforce have been fully implemented at European level, and progress is being made on others. The Commission has set out its intention to review, recast, merge or replace some 79 EU Acts as part of its Refit programme. We have long pushed for EU legislation to minimise unnecessary costs to business, particularly SMEs, and it is positive to see that reflected in the work programme and what appears to be a reinvigorated approach by the Commission to better regulation Overall, the work programme shows encouraging signs that the Commission wishes to take the EU in what we consider to be the right direction, at least on the economic priorities. It is important to judge the Commission by what it now does in practice. In our view that means implementing the work programme in a way that respects the principle of "Europe where necessary, but national wherever possible", reduces the burden of European regulation on business and eliminates barriers to growth, and supports increased competitiveness, trade and the completion of the single market. If that is the outcome, it will demonstrate important progress in the Government’s EU reform agenda During the past five years, we have already secured the first ever reduction of the EU’s budget; significant reform of the common fisheries policy, including a ban on discards; the launch of talks on an ambitious transatlantic trade deal; and important protections for non-eurozone countries in respect of banking union. Just five years ago, it would have been unthinkable for the first work programme of a new Commission, which would want to demonstrate its ambition, to contain just 23 priority initiatives. That is evidence that this country’s messages are being heard and acted on We launched this debate, and today there is growing consensus across Europe in favour of reform. We will continue to work energetically to ensure that the EU becomes more competitive and democratically accountable, deepens the single market to enable free movement of services and capital, and tackles abuse of the principle of free movement. I commend the motion to the House.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Labor
John Alan Redwood (Conservative, Centre-right): As the right hon. Gentleman is such a fan of all this interference, will he say which of the 23 measures will actually reduce the shocking levels of youth unemployment, which are the curse of Europe thanks to the idiotic policies of this Union?
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): I wonder if I might add to what my hon. Friend is saying. Although the Minister and the Leader of the House said that they could not possibly tell us who was blocking the provision, the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary, the First Secretary of State and the Minister for Europe all intimated that they were very much in favour of having the debate, and wished that it could be brought forward as a matter of urgency although forces beyond their control prevented it.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Social Welfare
John Alan Redwood (Conservative, Centre-right): On the narrower point of benefits, the Minister gave us encouraging news that we have control of our benefits system, as that is a reserved matter under the treaties. Does my hon. Friend recollect that on several occasions Ministers have been unable to change our benefits system in the way the British public want because of European legal blockages?
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Foreign Trade
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): Is this not all pie in the sky? There is no way in which the Commission or other member states will agree to these fundamental changes. Is that not why we need to go back to basics and have a free trade organisation without the free movement of people, just as we have free trade agreements with other countries without having to take in all their people as a right, without any control over them? Would it not be better to work towards, for example, visa waiver systems?
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Government Operations
David Roy Lidington (Conservative, Centre-right): The work programme was published on 17 December, the explanatory memorandum was laid before Parliament on 14 January, the European Scrutiny Committee referred it for debate on 28 January and we are debating it on 9 March. It is not as long a delay as there has, I am afraid, been with some others.
Commission Work Programme 2015 — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Alan Redwood (Conservative, Centre-right): I am sorry, but I do not have time. The hon. Gentleman wants to make his own speech Labour would be outraged, but because this is happening on the continent of Europe and is the result of the euro and economic union policies from which we have rightly opted out, they do not seem to care less. They just accept that it has to happen. I think this House should be deeply angry about the mass unemployment on the continent and deeply angry about the permanent recession that has hurt certain countries. We should be deeply angry about the shambles that is the euro, which is doing so much damage to prosperity, opportunity and life hopes. We have no time to discuss any of that because we have been given only 90 minutes.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
Robert Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Centre-right): What seriously worries me is the fact that Russia has declared that we are an enemy and also suggested that, if necessary, it will use nuclear weapons to pursue the problems it faces abroad. That worries all of us.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
Tobias Martin Ellwood (Conservative, Centre-right): I agree with the hon. Gentleman. New York presents the next opportunity for us to ensure that we push these points forward. It is sad, as Members have said, that we have not been able to move on this matter. Many Members spoke passionately and with concern that, if we do not seek a resolution on this, we could see further proliferation, with nations deciding to turn their back and to seek to arm There has been real progress at the consultations over the past couple of years. Remaining differences can be bridged with political will on both sides. We regret that, to date, further consultations have not proved possible, and we accept, sadly, that a conference will not take place before the review conference. As the hon. Gentleman points out, New York might be the opportunity for us to reconvene on this matter.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: International Affairs
Alistair James Hendrie Burt (Conservative, Centre-right): Will my hon. Friend confirm that the idea of the facilitator, Mr Laajava, to have these consultations resulted from his not being able to secure the conference itself? The consultation, far from being a step away from the conference and therefore something to criticise because it was not getting to the end that we wanted to reach, was a necessary step to build the confidence that would allow the conference to take place. My friend Jaakko Laajava is to be commended for what he is trying to do.
Todmorden and Calder High Schools — House of Commons, 2015-03-09
Topic: Education
Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Centre-right): I accept what my right hon. Friend says about surveys, but the local authority surveys of Todmorden and Calder high schools are consistent. For decades, Todmorden high school has been prioritised streets ahead of Calder high, yet under the national surveys it is completely the other way around. Surely there is cause to look again at the national surveys of those two schools, because they are completely at odds with what we know locally.
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Jeremy Paul Wright (Conservative, Centre-right): It is a long-standing convention that Law Officers’ advice is not published. However, as hon. Members will know, the Prime Minister is setting out today the case for taking further action in Syria, and he will also set out the legal basis for doing do.
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Jeremy Paul Wright (Conservative, Centre-right): As I say, the hon. Gentleman will see that the legal basis for action is, in the Government’s view, set out in what the Prime Minister intends to say. Indeed, he has responded as he said he would to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee report, and that response has been published this morning for all Members to see. As for the legal advice that the Law Officers give, it can be argued that the convention is there for very good reason. There are essentially two reasons. The first is to enable legal advice to be given to Government in a frank and open way, which is best done when advice is not published; and secondly, of course, the legal advice the Law Officers give is part of the collective responsibility of Cabinet decision-making. Again, there are good reasons for not publishing it on those grounds.
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Jeremy Paul Wright (Conservative, Centre-right): As I say, Members on both sides will have the chance to understand what the legal basis for the Government’s proposals will be, but there is a distinction to be made between the Government’s legal basis for action and the precise advice that Law Officers give. For the reasons I have explained, I do not think it sensible in what is undoubtedly an open and transparent democracy to publish that advice.
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Michael James Tomlinson-Mynors (Conservative, Centre-right): In the absence of United Nations Security Council resolution 2249, there are still arguments that airstrikes are legal. Does the Attorney General agree that, in the light of that resolution, the legal case has been strengthened?
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Jeremy Paul Wright (Conservative, Centre-right): I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that there were legal grounds for action in the absence of a Security Council resolution. Such a resolution is not necessary, in my view, to justify action of this kind. It is, of course, extremely useful that what the UN Security Council resolution clearly does is underline the logic for action in the way that we are setting out today. I agree with my hon. Friend.
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): The Attorney General may say it is not necessary, but does he think it would be better if a chapter 7 resolution explicitly endorsing military action against ISIS was passed at the United Nations? Have the Government made any attempts to achieve such a resolution, and which countries do the Government believe would block it?
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Jeremy Paul Wright (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend will realise, of course, that that particular resolution was secured with the unanimous support of the Security Council. What it indicates is that all necessary measures should be taken in order to counter ISIL. As I have said, it is important to recognise that the legal basis for action here, which the Prime Minister will set out today, is not dependent on the presence of a Security Council resolution, but I think that what has been agreed in the Security Council underlines the case that we are making, which is that action should be taken and that there is a lawful basis for doing so.
Syria: Legality of Airstrikes — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.; If he will publish his legal advice on the legality of the UK carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the absence of a UN Security Council resolution on that matter.
Philip Thomas Hollobone (Conservative, Centre-right): President Hollande has said that France is at war with Daesh, but my understanding is that no one has formally declared war on anyone. Will the Attorney General advise the House on the merits and demerits of a formal declaration of war?
Hate Crimes against Disabled People — House of Commons, 2015-11-26
Topic: Law and Crime
Robert James Buckland (Conservative, Centre-right): The Crown Prosecution Service recently revised its disability hate crime legal guidance for prosecutors. As part of its ongoing commitment to achieving meaningful improvement in disability hate crime prosecutions, it has mandated that disability hate crime training for all prosecutors should be completed by the end of the year.