argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Public Lands
Questions: The Valuation Office Agency appears to be a law unto itself. At the click of a mouse, it seems to be able to change the way in which large sites such as the Vodafone headquarters and the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston are rated, wiping millions off the income of a small unitary local authority such as West Berkshire. Will the Minister agree to look into this matter?; As North East Lincolnshire Council is being forced to shut down its credit union services, does the Minister agree that his Department’s funding cuts to councils have been great news for loan sharks?; Does my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State agree that the actions announced in last week’s autumn statement will improve not only access to housing but the living standards of ordinary working people and their families?; As my hon. Friend the Minister will know, Bath and North East Somerset Council recently voted in favour of entering the west of England devolution deal. Will he join me in congratulating the council on making this decision, which will devolve powers to the region and allow it to invest in affordable housing projects across Bath and the west of England?; Leeds City Council is developing a local plan, but reports suggest that it is unable to demonstrate that it has a five-year land supply, which is endangering sites that the plan seeks to save. Has the Department considered giving some leeway to councils that are in the process of developing a local plan so that they do not need such a long-term housing supply?; While I welcome the £55 million of funding for the South East local enterprise partnership, it falls well short of the £229 million that was applied for, which would have secured a great deal of business growth and economic development in the area. Will my hon. Friend point me in the direction of any future funding that might bring us to the table to secure the economic growth that is needed?; With £3.15 billion allocated for 90,000 new homes in London and a doubling of the money spent to combat rough sleeping, what action can Ministers take to ensure that that money is used quickly to provide the homes that people desperately need, so that no one is forced to sleep rough?; If we are to have a local plan-led system, what is the Minister going to do to make sure that local plans are saluted, especially by planning inspectors?; Many of my constituents are keen to see an ambitious devolution deal secured for the west of England. Will the Secretary of State update the House on the progress that is being made on that devolution deal?
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): Our countryside is not littered with advertising hoardings, unlike in other countries in Europe, because of the action taken by a Labour Government through the Town and Country Planning Act 1947. However, lots of farmers and other landowners are now circumventing the rules by parking great big lorries with hoardings by roads. What are the Government going to do to stop this?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Minister for agreeing to amend the Bill in this important area. As he is addressing the responsibility of social media sites, what action is he thinking of taking to prevent what happened recently, when Facebook refused to give the police information that it had relating to a missing child?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Fiona Margaret Mactaggart (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has spent more time in the past few weeks thinking about children and pornography than I am sure he wanted to. The Bill deals with the publication of pornography, but we also need to help children to be more resilient and understand that those images are not normal sexual behaviour and are the kind of violence that should not be part of relationships, because research by the NSPCC and others tells us that children, and boys in particular, think it is normal. What discussions has he had with the Department for Education to try to build greater resilience among children to some of the images that, despite the efforts in the Bill, they will see?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend makes a valuable point. I am a former teacher—from the analogue age, I hasten to add—and I have no doubt that many teachers who started their careers around the same time as I did would fall into that category Statutory online education could work in tandem, as I have said, but protecting our children is a major challenge and it cannot happen without education. That is why I was disappointed that the Minister chose not to support our proposal. I believe that it represents the other side of the coin to what the Government are trying to achieve through age verification. We contend that our measures are necessary, and we will therefore divide the House on this matter if we have to Our new clause 32 would oblige the age verification regulator to ensure that all age verification providers—the companies that put the tools on websites to ensure compliance—were approved by the regulator. It would also oblige those providers to perform a data protection impact assessment and to make it publicly available, as well as to perform an array of other duties. The new clause is designed to address concerns about the practicality of age verification checks. It would ensure that only minimal data were required, that those data were kept secure and that individuals’ liberty and privacy were protected We have not been reassured by the Minister’s comments, either in Committee or today, that the fact that age verification software is improving is enough. We should be able to guarantee the privacy of an individual before the verification tool comes into force. We are not asking anything unreasonable of the regulator or of the age verification providers. The principles of privacy, anonymity and proportionality should underpin the age verification tool, but as far as I am aware, they have not as yet featured in any draft guidance, codes of practice or documents accompanying the Bill If anyone thinks I am being partisan, I can tell them that the Information Commissioner agrees with me on this. In its response to the Department’s consultation on age verification for pornography, the Information Commissioner’s Office stated: "The Commissioner’s concern is that any solution implemented must be compliant with the requirements of the DPA and PECR." That refers to the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 that sit alongside it.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): I will finish the quote, then I will give way. The Information Commissioner’s response went on: "The concept of ‘privacy by design’ would seem particularly relevant in the context of age verification—that is, designing a system that appropriately respects individuals’ privacy whilst achieving the stated aim. In practical terms, this would mean only collecting and recording the minimum data required in the circumstances, having assessed what that minimum was. It would also mean ensuring that the purposes for which any data is used are carefully and restrictively defined, and that any activities keep to those restricted purposes. In the context of preventing children from accessing online commercial pornography, there is a clear attribute which needs to be proven in each case—that is, whether an individual’s age is above the required threshold. Any solution considered needs to be focussed on proving the existence or absence of that attribute, to the exclusion of other more detailed information"— [Interruption.] I will go on for a lot longer if the Minister keeps making gestures at me. The quote concludes: "Any solution considered needs to be focussed on proving the existence or absence of that attribute, to the exclusion of other more detailed information (such as actual date of birth)."
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is why new clause 7 is so helpful. Consumers could prevent that from happening by voluntarily asking for a cap. Citizens Advice received more than 60,000 inquiries about telephone and broadband debt, with its in-debt specialists dealing with nearly 27,000 individual mobile phone debt cases. Consumers support the measure, with more than 77% of them welcoming the idea This is not the first time such a proposal has been considered: in 2012, Ofcom considered introducing regulations but could not overcome the objections of providers, who argued it would be too costly. In fact, the lack of regulation is what has proved too costly—too costly for struggling consumers. Two providers now do what is suggested in our new clause. The Government say they want to help the JAMs—those who are just about managing—so if they fail to support the new clause, it will show they are not serious when they say that.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Ian Colin Lucas (Labour, Centre-left): I strongly support this proposal and the new clause. Constituents have contacted me specifically about this point, because the complexity of the tariffs and the lack of knowledge about what makes up the information and the cost is huge for consumers, and this proposal would be a major step forward for them.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): A large number of hon. and right hon. Members want to catch my eye. This debate finishes at 6.47pm, so I urge speakers to keep their remarks brief so that everyone can speak. I call George Howarth.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): I am pleased to take part in this debate, and I was pleased to put my name to new clause 1. I am extremely pleased to follow the right hon. Member for Maldon (Mr Whittingdale), and I am glad to see the new regime on the Government Front Bench, who have basically accepted new clause 1. The right hon. Gentleman’s argument that because something is legal and enjoyed by grown-ups, we should not have restrictions for children, is patently absurd.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): It is a prime example. I might even have had it in my notes, before I truncated them considerably in order to make some progress. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to point it out New clause 8 opposes the way the Government are dealing with the free television licences for over-75s. The continuation of free licences for over-75s was a promise made in the Conservative party’s manifesto, which many over-75s voted for in good faith, but now, just 16 months later, the Government are legislating to do away with that pledge in all but name, on the pretence that it should now be for the BBC to decide who gets a free television licence. I am afraid that the promise in the manifesto was unequivocal. It said: "We will maintain all the current pensioner benefits including Winter Fuel Payments, free bus passes, free prescriptions and TV licences" Notice the list of Labour achievements in that quote, Madam Deputy Speaker! It said "maintain" not "play pass the policy parcel", which is what the Government are doing. They are legislating to hand over responsibility to a body that cannot afford to maintain the entitlement.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): Indeed. That was my reason for using the metaphor of holding a loaded gun to the BBC’s head. Opposition Members do not consider that the deal was negotiated in good faith. As my hon. Friend’s point suggests, it amounted to little other than blackmail.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Other
Luciana Clare Goldsmith (Berger) (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree that, given that this issue featured in the Conservative manifesto, it would be fantastic if the Government came forward to support the new clause, so that they could implement a promise they made at the last general election?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Nicholas Desmond John Smith (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree that true fans do not stand a chance nowadays, because touts have evolved from blokes in sheepskin jackets lurking outside stadiums trying to sell spare tickets, to IT crooks who harvest thousands of tickets just seconds after they go on sale?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Other
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): I do agree with that. In Committee, the Minister told us a tear-jerking story about his efforts to buy tickets to a Paul Simon concert at the Royal Albert Hall. We look forward to a review when he rises to speak. At the moment he is chewing, so it is "The Sound of Silence".
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Luciana Clare Goldsmith (Berger) (Labour, Centre-left): I look forward to hearing my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Sunderland West (Mrs Hodgson) expand on this point in more detail. Is it not time for us finally to do something about ticket-touting, on behalf of all the fans in the country who just want to enjoy music? I have not been a Member of Parliament for all that long, but we have been talking about this issue for the past six years. I see that tickets for tomorrow’s Justin Bieber concert are on sale for more than £1,000. Can we not do something about that, and ensure that everyone in the country can enjoy music?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Other
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman might have missed it, but we have already had Second Reading and Committee stage, and we are now on Report, so that matter is likely to come up in the House of Lords.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): I am pleased to follow the right hon. Member for Maldon (Mr Whittingdale). I was a little unkind to him earlier this evening, so I would like to make amends by saying that he spoke a lot of good sense on illegal downloads I would like to speak to amendments 25 and 26. I am chair of the all-party group on the National Union of Journalists, and the arrangements for the payment of the secretariat appear under my name in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. The NUJ was extremely helpful in drawing this problem to my attention and drafting the amendments. Part 5 of the Bill appears to put freedom of expression and journalistic rights under serious threat by criminalising onward unauthorised disclosure of information. Specifically, clauses 49 and 50 completely fail to recognise the role of journalists in providing information that is in the public interest; I think that is the point the hon. Member for Worthing West (Sir Peter Bottomley) was trying to make.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): I am glad that is not the Minister’s intent—I did not think that it was—but the Media Lawyers Association highlighted in its written evidence that it thought there was a problem. So if the Minister wants to avoid his colleagues in another place having to have this debate again in two months’ time, perhaps he could write to me with a full explanation of what he thinks is going on, because I think that there might be a problem with the Bill in this respect.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Civil Rights
Lilian Rachel Greenwood (Labour, Centre-left): Like my hon. Friend, I welcome the Minister’s commitment to return to the matter in the other place. Does she agree that it might be helpful if the Minister were willing to meet the all-party parliamentary group on deafness, which has made the subtitling campaign one of its top priorities for this year?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-28
Topic: Mixed Topics
Katherine Anne Green (Labour, Centre-left): Indeed. My hon. Friend makes my second point. The Minister indicated that discussions had taken place with disability organisations. It is vital that the approach to developing on-demand accessible services is undertaken as a co-production, that disabled people and disability groups are right at the heart of the design of these services, and that the Government make progress on this matter. Finally, I encourage the Minister and his colleagues to think big about whether this is an opportunity to take forward the use of British sign language in broadcast and online on-demand services. There is the opportunity to offer signed services on these channels too, and I hope the Minister might be willing to investigate how far that could be taken in this context.
Prison Officers Association: Protest Action — House of Commons, 2016-11-15
Topic: Other
James McMahon (Labour, Centre-left): The tone of the statement from the Secretary of State today has been absolutely shameful. It is no wonder that relationships are at an all-time low. Will she take this opportunity to apologise to the House and to the officers for allowing things to get this far?
Investigatory Powers Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-15
Topic: Civil Rights
Diane Julie Abbott (Labour, Centre-left): I am glad to rise in support, once again, of these very important amendments. I believe that any member of the public who just heard the Solicitor General’s speech will be puzzled about the Government’s resistance to implementing an aspect of Leveson that they agreed to in principle some time ago Labour fully supports the Lords amendments and has consistently and genuinely called for the Leveson recommendations to be implemented in full. A new system of independent self-regulation was agreed by the three main political parties in 2013, following extensive consultation with victims of press intrusion, and Labour believes that the promises made to them should be honoured. If the best that the Government can come up with is that hoary old doctrine of unripe time—"It’s a good idea but not now"—they must be a little desperate. It is disappointing that we have to speak to the amendments yet again to get the Government to honour their agreements. It is a breach of the cross-party agreement, and breaks promises made by the House to the victims Lords amendment 15B would not be necessary had the Government fulfilled their stated commitment to implement section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which they have promised to do innumerable times. Happily, the amendment goes further than section 40 and would not require ministerial approval, meaning that it would automatically implement section 40 in relation to phone hacking claims. This would restate the clear intention of Parliament as previously expressed in 2013. Ministers have talked about riding roughshod. The Society of Editors, the National Union of Journalists, with the backing of the TUC, and many others concerned with the freedom of the press, have said that there is the potential to ride roughshod over freedoms.
Small Charitable Donations and Childcare Payments Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): On consultation, the Minister has mentioned the scouts and a number of other organisations, but has she considered consulting the Brethren? I am sure that she will recall that, during the last Parliament, the Brethren lost its charity status for a while and there was a large number of debates on it.
Small Charitable Donations and Childcare Payments Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-15
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Rebecca Long-Bailey (Labour, Centre-left): With the leave of the House, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the clause Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 3 Regulations on local branches and groups ‘(1) The Small Charitable Donations Act 2012 is amended as set out in subsections (2) and (3) (2) After section 5(1) (general provisions on meaning of "connected"), insert— "(1A) This section is subject to the provisions of regulations made under section 5A (regulations on local branches and groups)." (3) After section 5, insert the following— "5A Regulations on local branches and groups (1) The Treasury shall by regulations prescribe organisations in which local or regional branches or groups may not be considered to be connected for the purposes of sections 4 and 5 (2) The Treasury shall publish the first set of draft regulations made under subsection (1) no later than 31 October 2017 (3) Before publishing draft regulations under this section, the Treasury shall consult— (a) the Scout Association; (b) the Guide Association; (c) the Combined Cadet Force Association; and (d) such other organisations as appear to the Treasury to be relevant."—(Rebecca Long Bailey.) This new clause requires the Treasury to identify organisations with local or regional branch or group structures in order that those local and regional branches or groups can be separately eligible under the scheme, and to consult certain organisations about the regulations in draft. Brought up, and read the First time. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.
Small Charitable Donations and Childcare Payments Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-15
Topic: Mixed Topics
Rebecca Long-Bailey (Labour, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment 1, page 2, leave out lines 1 to 6 and insert— "(a) in the heading after "small", delete "cash payment" and insert "donation"; (b) in sub-paragraph (1) omit the words "in cash"; (c) after that sub-paragraph insert— "(1A) The gift must be made— (b) by cheque; (c) by electronic communication; or (d) by a contactless payment." (d) in sub-paragraph (3) after the definition of "cash" insert— "cheque" means a written order instructing a bank to pay upon its presentation to the person designated in it, or the to the person possessing it, a certain sum of money from the account of the person who draws it; "electronic communication" means a payment made via the internet or text message." This amendment would extend the range of methods by which payments can be made under the Gift Aid Small Donations Scheme.
Small Charitable Donations and Childcare Payments Bill — House of Commons, 2016-11-15
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment 2, page 2, line 6, at end insert— "or (c) by a comparable method prescribed by the Treasury by regulations." This amendment would give the Treasury a power to prescribe by regulations other methods of payment comparable to contactless payment in the future.