argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Julian Carlton Knight (Conservative, Centre-right): I have discussed with my local hospital trust aspects of free parking and what we can do to help people. One point mentioned to me is that such a scheme might take people off front-line care services, or at least off front-line administration services, when they are asked to step in and help with the parking or to administer a parking scheme such as the one proposed in the Bill.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): I am following my hon. Friend’s speech very closely. Is the heart of what he is saying that the scheme proposed in the Bill would prove so complex to administer that it would in effect be the end of all car parking charges, because to continue to have any charges would make the whole system collapse?
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): I do indeed. The more the motor car is used, the better. My hon. Friend is getting to the nub of the matter. One can ration either by price or by queue. There is no other way of determining how supply and demand meet.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): I suspect it means that people are parking in places where they should not be parking within the car park because there are not enough spaces, so they park somewhere where there is not a space.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful for that guidance, Mr Deputy Speaker. The hon. Lady has intervened on me more often than anybody else, which has held me up in making my remarks. My advice is that if she wants me to crack on, she should not keep intervening on me so that I have the opportunity to do so A big geographical inequality would result from the Bill because car parking charges vary wildly from one part of the country to another—from £4.26 in the north-east to £11.85—
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Again, I will move on As the Torbay scheme is the nearest to the one that the hon. Member for Burnley proposes, I asked some questions through freedom of information requests about the impact and take-up of the scheme. I asked how many people had used the scheme since it was introduced, and the reply from Torbay was: "We are unable to provide you with the information requested as it is not held electronically or in a central location. We do not record the details of carers, only a verification that they are on the register." We do not even know how many people take up the scheme that has been introduced.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): Is my hon. Friend saying that carers who currently receive the benefit of free parking would have to be removed from the Torbay scheme if the Bill were brought into law, because they would not qualify and Torbay would have to change the scheme?
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): I knew it was a mistake giving way to my hon. Friend, and that he would try to lead me astray once again. I will leave him to consider Barnett consequentials in his remarks—I am desperately trying to reach a conclusion I appreciate that the hon. Lady genuinely wants to help carers, and if the principle behind her Bill is to support carers, I will happily support that principle. However, of all the worthwhile issues and campaigns championed by different carers organisations and charities, it seems that she has picked the one dud. I would have been happy to support many other campaigns for carers had she raised them. For example, parent carers could be offered an assessment rather than having to request one for their children, and we could introduce measures such as: "Clear recognition in law that parent carer assessments and services must have the promotion of their well-being at the heart of what they do Consolidation of legislation on parent carers from three different Acts" I would have been prepared to support such worthwhile campaigns to help carers, but I fear that the hon. Lady has picked the wrong campaign. For future reference I urge her to consider some of the other campaigns that carers organisations would like to be raised. I think she would get a lot of support from across the House and—I hope—from the Government In conclusion, the Bill is ill-thought through and many areas are far too vague. It will be a logistical nightmare to enforce and implement, and it would cost NHS trusts up and down the country millions of pounds, forcing higher charges on other visitors, or risking patient services. It would exempt a lot of people who are just as worthy recipients of parking concessions—I think that the Government’s guidance on hospital car parking is far more sensible than the provisions in the Bill, and they encompass more people who deserve to be considered. Hospitals already have power to implement the policy suggested by the hon. Lady if they wish, and perhaps on reflection she should go away and come back at some point in future with a different Bill. I have not mentioned the money resolution consequences of this Bill, but I hope that others will consider that issue. I have not seen any money resolution proposals. Finally—very finally—I have people visiting Parliament today, so I apologise in advance if I cannot be here for the entire debate. I will try to stay for as much as possible because it is an interesting discussion.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): Perhaps they are, perhaps they are not—I do not know. I genuinely wish the hon. Lady well in her time in the House, and I do not doubt the worthy sentiment in this Bill. We all support what carers do in this country, but I think the Bill is misguided.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my hon. Friend agree with the further point that clause 5(1)(b) might provide an incentive to increase the total number of carers because people would have a strong need to say that they were carers or had the intention to be carers—even if the reality were completely different, which would mean falsely inflating the figures?
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
David Nuttall (Conservative, Centre-right): Parking places are finite, Mr Deputy Speaker. If the Bill encouraged more carers to visit hospitals, which is what I think would happen, it would make it easier for them to gain access to car parks, and one consequence of that might be a knock-on effect on the income that would—
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Jacob William Rees-Mogg (Conservative, Centre-right): Perhaps my hon. Friend intends to mention it, but he is ignoring the reduction in the availability of spaces that would come about without charges—people would be able to park all day, and there would be much less control. It is not going to make it easier for carers to park if all the spaces are taken and they are blocked.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Government Operations
Julian Carlton Knight (Conservative, Centre-right): It is very interesting that my hon. Friend mentions devolution in this context. Should there be devolution from next April in the Greater Manchester area and if this legislation were introduced soon afterwards, could the numbers that devolution has been predicated on no longer be correct? Could we have to go back to the drawing-board in terms of Manchester devolution and how the finances are worked out in respect of hospital parking charges?
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
David Nuttall (Conservative, Centre-right): I shall bring my comments to a conclusion. Given the real likelihood that the effect of the Bill will be to reduce the income from car parking, it must be a possibility that the legislation would increase the cost of the NHS to the public purse. In the first year of the abolition of parking charges in Scotland, the sum of £1.4 million was given to Scottish health boards by the Scottish Government, so I wonder whether the Bill might require a money resolution in due course, as my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley has suggested It is a worthy aim to try to help carers with their hospital car parking charges. In reality, however, there are a number of problems. Fundamentally, we are faced with this question: what should £200 million be spent on—healthcare or free parking? The answer might be to say that we will exempt only one group, but if we exempt carers, should we not exempt staff, for example, or armed forces personnel? The list soon expands. However well-intentioned the Bill is, we have to look at the problem in the round. No one likes paying parking charges, but the fact is that, alongside general taxation, income from car parking ultimately supports front-line services I commend the hon. Member for Burnley for her work on the Bill but, for the reasons I have outlined, I cannot support it today.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Government Operations
David Nuttall (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend says that he has looked at these contracts. Has he noticed how long they were for? I am rather concerned that if the Bill is introduced, it would affect the viability of those contracts.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
David Nuttall (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton (Liz McInnes) made the point that not everybody has access to the internet, particularly many elderly people. Does my hon. Friend agree that we should perhaps consider ensuring that information about car parking charges is included in every letter sent out offering an appointment at a hospital?
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend has been generous in giving way. I have listened to the arguments and the one problem I have is this: should we be using car parking charges to fund the NHS? Should we not fund the NHS properly? I am slightly uncomfortable with that.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
Julian Carlton Knight (Conservative, Centre-right): I understand entirely where my hon. Friend is coming from and in an ideal world I would agree. I would like to see free hospital parking. However, I recognise that there are pressures on our car parks, and that car parking charges at a hospital have to reflect the car parking charges in the local area; otherwise we will have the problem that we encountered in Solihull prior to the introduction of charges, when people were parking at the hospital and then shopping. It is a fine balancing act and it should be dealt with by individual areas on a case-by-case basis.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Nuttall (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my hon. Friend agree that it would have been helpful if we had been given an explanation of the costs of administering the proposed scheme? We could then have based this debate on some actual figures.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): I hear what the hon. Lady says. I will not go down that route, Madam Deputy Speaker, because we have had enough debate about tax credits and I do not think you want time taken up on them. My point is that many people less well-off than the carers exempted under the Bill will actually pay for the cost of such exemptions. Interestingly, the hon. Lady did not disagree with that point in her intervention, but that is one of the Bill’s perverse consequences There is another problem. Clause 1(1) states: "providing bodies shall make arrangements to exempt…carers engaged in…the qualifying activities…from charges for parking their cars in spaces provided for service users at hospitals" It does not state by whom the spaces are provided.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Transportation
David Nuttall (Conservative, Centre-right): I apologise that I did not cover that point in more detail earlier. My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The implication of the clause is surely that other car park providers may be affected, not just NHS hospitals that provide car parks.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Alistair James Hendrie Burt (Conservative, Centre-right): It is a pleasure to respond to the debate. I want to make some general comments before I go into the details of the Bill and before time beats us, but let me first congratulate the hon. Member for Burnley (Julie Cooper) on her success in the ballot, and on using it to present this Bill. I am very grateful to her for discussing it with me in advance—we have met twice—and for prompting others to take an interest in it I think I have made it clear to the hon. Lady from the outset that the Government cannot support the Bill, for reasons that have been mentioned by my hon. Friends in connection with the discretion that we need to give to hospitals. I shall say more about that shortly. I think that I also made it clear to the hon. Lady—and she was very generous in remarking on this—that we were willing to change our guidance principles, which I shall read out later in order to show where the changes have been made. Those changes are amendments, and as far as I am concerned, they are the "Julie Cooper amendments", because if the hon. Lady had not presented them to us, we would not have had them. Although I cannot support a change in the legislation, a material change will be made, and I hope that trusts and hospital authorities will take advantage of it when they feel that that is in their interests and also the right thing to do. Let me now say a few words about carers. The hon. Member for Worsley and Eccles South (Barbara Keeley) knows a great deal about the subject, having spent considerable time dealing with carers’ issues over the years in her previous role as consultant to the Princess Royal Trust for Carers and on the local council. She understands the carer’s world very well, and I pay tribute to her for that Although I will say a little bit about carers, I want to say something about the car parking aspects of the Bill as well. There is no dispute between anyone in this House about the value associated with carers. I felt it was reasonable for me to mention the support I believed carers had from the Government at present. I did that not only because of what we say about valuing what carers do but because of our recognition that the system could not exist without them. However, the system could not exist if it had to compensate carers for every particular cost; that just cannot be done The 2011 census identified 5.4 million carers in England. To put that in context, the state spends £16 billion each year on adult social care. The total market is estimated to be worth £22 billion. The Office for National Statistics has valued informal care at about £61.7 billion. Whatever the actual figure may be, it is immense and this could not be done without the voluntary contribution of carers.
Hospital Parking Charges (Exemption for Carers) Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Social Welfare
Alistair James Hendrie Burt (Conservative, Centre-right): No, it is not impossible, but the whole point of what we are talking about is to provide discretion, and I will come back to one or two of the elements related to carers As I have discussed with the hon. Member for Burnley, we are looking at the strategy for carers in the round, and I have got the responsibility of doing that. We will look at all sorts of things for the future. The economics will come into it—I take that point—and I think it is best to look at this as an overall strategy. I have offered to involve the hon. Lady, who has agreed; indeed, I would like one or two Back-Bench colleagues from all parties to assist me when that consideration of strategy gets up and going because of their particular interest in the subject. The overall impact on carers of all sorts of things that are happening at present can be taken into account. There will still be finite financial limits, which I will come to soon, but where life can be made easier, we obviously are looking to do that The hon. Member for Worsley and Eccles South mentioned the bedroom tax. The relevant rules already take account of the needs of carers. For example, non-spouse resident carers plus others who need to stay overnight are allowed an extra bedroom—[Interruption.] Well, if that is not true, perhaps the hon. Lady would like to intervene on me, but that is what the law says. Discretions are also offered by local authorities, and that too provides an opportunity to take account of what carers might need.
Child Abuse Allegations (Police Resources) — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Law and Crime
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) for securing this debate and for raising this important matter. I appreciate the way in which she highlighted the work of the Shirley Oaks Survivors Association, which is clearly doing very good work in her constituency. The hon. Member for Streatham (Mr Umunna) has also taken a close interest in that issue. I pay tribute to them for what they are doing, as well as for highlighting the work of Operation Trinity I want to echo some of the basic themes of the hon. Lady’s speech. It is important to acknowledge, first and foremost, that no case of child sexual abuse is historical for the victims and survivors of this abhorrent crime. They must live with the consequences of the abuse they have suffered each and every day of their lives. It is absolutely right that the victims and survivors of abuse, wherever or whenever it took place, should feel able to come forward to report abuse to the police and get the support they need. Let me be clear: tackling child sexual abuse is a priority for the Government. We have stated consistently that when an allegation of child sexual abuse is made, whether it has occurred recently or in the past, it should be thoroughly investigated by the police so that the facts can be established As Chief Constable Simon Bailey, the national policing lead for child protection and abuse investigations, has said, we are at a watershed moment in facing up to the scale of child sexual abuse. Victims and survivors of abuse are, more than ever, feeling confident to report their experiences. This is encouraging, but also an immense challenge for the police and other agencies.
Child Abuse Allegations (Police Resources) — House of Commons, 2015-10-30
Topic: Law and Crime
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate that association on its work. This is about giving people confidence to come forward and about the manner in which that evidence can be collated, but—as I have indicated—we need to do more work. I think there is growing confidence that people can come forward to the police, and I am sure that other organisations, foundations and charities have a role to play, working alongside the police. It is important that people feel able to come forward with a sense that their complaints will be investigated thoroughly and properly, as I have described this afternoon. The broad range of activity that I have outlined shows that the Government take all allegations of child sexual abuse extremely seriously, no matter where or when it occurs. Again, I thank the hon. Lady for the way that she brought this matter to the House. Clearly, work is taking place in her borough and constituency to raise awareness, give confidence, and underline the fact that people can come forward and have their allegations properly investigated. We will continue the urgent work of overhauling the way that our police, social services and other agencies work together to protect vulnerable children. I thank the hon. Lady for highlighting this matter, and I assure her of the priority that is given to this issue by the Government. We will continue to keep the House updated Question put and agreed to,
Mental Health: Children and Young People — House of Commons, 2015-07-07
Topic: Education
Alistair James Hendrie Burt (Conservative, Centre-right): I agree with my hon. Friend when he commends the involvement of young people in discussing their services. Only last week, the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey (Mr Gyimah) and I attended a youth select committee organised by the British Youth Council to do something very similar There are two reasons why I think these services have not been so good in the past. First, there is the difficulty of collecting information and data; and, secondly, there is the complexity of financing for services. I hope that we will address both of those, and we will ensure that people know about this so that things do not slide back by being more transparent about both.
English Votes on English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-07
Topic: Government Operations
Graham Charles Stuart (Conservative, Centre-right): Surely it is true to say that discussions about future devolutionary change can go on. What is proposed is a change in the Standing Orders simply to give a veto to the representatives of the people affected. That does not lead to an English Parliament or to English initiative; it finally brings a little justice into the system. It is based on what we had in our manifesto, and it should be proceeded with quickly.
English Votes on English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-07
Topic: International Affairs
James Jacob Gilchrist Berry (Conservative, Centre-right): Does the right hon. Gentleman not accept that the biggest danger facing the Union is not Scottish nationalism, but English nationalism? If we fail to deal with English votes on English laws in a timely manner, as set out in our manifesto, which the people voted for, English nationalism will see off our Union.
English Votes on English Laws — House of Commons, 2015-07-07
Topic: Education
Andrew James Bridgen (Conservative, Centre-right): What does the right hon. Gentleman say to my constituents who see the inherent unfairness of a situation in which he can vote on education matters affecting my constituency but I cannot vote on education matters affecting his? My constituents might quite rightly accuse him of wanting to have his porridge and eat it, and that is unfair to England.