argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-08
Topic: Foreign Trade
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Perhaps my hon. Friend will join me in correcting the hon. Member for Walsall North (Eddie Hughes), as South Korea is very important for Scottish trade. As a result of the EU-negotiated deal, whisky goes to South Korea on a 0% tariff. The former chief executive of the Scottish Whisky Association has expressed the view that without the heft of the EU, Scottish whisky—the UK’s biggest export—would not have had the benefit of that deal.
Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-08
Topic: Foreign Trade
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I think that we should remain in the customs union and the single market, because then we would not have any of these issues. I appreciate that the Minister says that the Government are looking at this, but I am trying to make it clear how important this matter is, and I hope that I have been able to do that in my discussion of cumulation.
Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-08
Topic: Foreign Trade
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): May I pursue the issue of tariff-rate quotas? Is it not the case that, even if countries receive the same amount in total—if they were previously able to distribute 100 tonnes of goods, and in future they could distribute 70 to the EU and 30 to the UK—they might challenge that on the basis that if the UK market collapses, they will not be able to transfer that amount to another country, as they currently can?
Coastal Communities — House of Commons, 2018-01-22
Topic: International Affairs
Alison Emily Thewliss (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I extend the condolences of the Scottish National party group to the friends and family of Councillor Kieran Quinn for the sadness and sudden loss they have faced Is the Minister aware of the Cardiff declaration by the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions? It was signed in November by the Scottish Government, alongside representatives of more than 20 other EU regions. Does he agree with its statement that Brexit will have a disproportionate impact on coastal regions and their key economic sectors?
Coastal Communities — House of Commons, 2018-01-22
Topic: International Affairs
Alison Emily Thewliss (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): That does not really answer the question. Coastal communities face economic and social deprivation, and the Cardiff declaration highlights the fact that a hard Brexit will exacerbate that. Will the Minister meet representatives of the CPMR, and does he agree with them that if this Government do the unthinkable and walk away from a deal, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should still be able to access EU funding programmes?
Private Sector Pensions — House of Commons, 2018-01-22
Topic: Labor
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) on securing it That we are talking about private sector pensions again highlights the fundamental need to address the regulation of the pensions industry—something that the SNP has been calling for for years, but that has until now fallen on deaf ears. The BHS pension scheme was in deficit by more than £500 million. Carillion is estimated to be up to £900 million in the red, and there are over 5,000 other private sector defined benefit schemes in deficit, to the tune of £900 billion—a ticking time bomb for savers However, the real issue is that, while top executives make bad decisions and are rewarded for it, 11 million people who rely on a final salary pension could still be at risk of having the rug pulled from under their feet and of facing reduced entitlements should cases such as BHS or Carillion continue to be repeated. The SNP has long called for the establishment of an independent pensions commission to ensure that employees’ savings are protected and that a more progressive approach to fairer savings is considered. Alongside that, will the UK Government make sure that the Pensions Regulator is now given the appropriate authority to step in and protect the interests of savers and pensioners before cases such as those of BHS and Carillion happen again?
Private Sector Pensions — House of Commons, 2018-01-22
Topic: Labor
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As Carillion owes millions of pounds to subcontractors such as small plumbing companies, it is inevitable that there will be other insolvencies. If a plumbing company goes under, its nominal liabilities transfer to fellow employers through a multi-employer pension scheme. That is clearly unfair, but it happens because the PPF refuses to act as guarantor of last resort for multi-employer schemes. When will the Government end that anomaly? If they will not, will they support my ten-minute rule Bill that would sort out the situation?
Occupied Palestinian Territories — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: International Affairs
Thomas Sheppard (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Will the Government oppose President Trump’s latest threat to withdraw funding from UNRWA, and will the Government attend a conference of donor countries, convened by the Norwegian Government and the EU, to discuss the imminent crisis that would result?
Yemen: Humanitarian Aid — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: International Affairs
Christopher Murray Alexander Law (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As we all know, there are no winners in war, and in comments to The Daily Telegraph before Christmas the Secretary of State correctly said that Saudi Arabia has "no excuses" for blocking food and fuel shipments to Yemen. Is it not therefore sheer hypocrisy and simply inexcusable that her Government are providing billions of pounds-worth of arms sales to Saudi Arabia when 7 million Yemeni people are facing the worst famine in decades?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Patrick Gethins (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): We obviously work closely with our EU partners on the delivery of international aid. As the Secretary of State makes her plans for working with the EU after we leave, is she working on the assumption that Turkey will be a member state?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: Macroeconomics
Questions: What better way to start the Year of Engineering than by seeing manufacturing output at its highest level in a decade and productivity on the up? May I invite my right hon. Friend to commit her Government to securing and supporting UK manufacturing and the important exports it delivers?; I thank the Prime Minister for visiting Cheam on Saturday where she heard from local residents about the poor services provided by the complacent Lib-Dem council. People should not have to settle for second best. Does she agree that we need to unlock the potential of Sutton, and indeed of London, on 3 May by giving residents across London the opportunity to get great services and value for money by voting Conservative?
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Nineteen months after the EU referendum, the Prime Minister has not a shred of economic analysis on the impact of leaving the single market. On Monday, the Scottish Government published their second analysis paper revealing some horrifying facts: leaving the single market will cost each Scottish citizen up to £2,300 a year. How many jobs have to be lost and how much of a financial hit will families have to take before the Prime Minister recognises the folly of leaving the single market?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: Government Operations
Martin John Docherty-Hughes (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. It has come to my attention via a story by Peter Geoghegan on the website The Ferret that the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Wycombe (Mr Baker), whom I have informed that I will be mentioning him in the House, may be in breach of the rules concerning the Register of Members’ Financial Interests The hon. Member is listed on the website of the Cobden Centre as a co-founder; and he is listed by Companies House as a director in papers that were last updated only in September. Of most interest to the House would be the centre’s stance on Brexit. Although there is no question that the hon. Member has a pecuniary interest in the organisation, it would seem to me that the directorship of the company contravenes paragraph 55(b) of the guide to the rules on the registration of Members’ financial interests, namely: "Any other interest, if the Member considers that it might reasonably be thought by others to influence his or her actions or words as a Member in the same way as a financial interest." Let me emphasise the next part: "This might include an unpaid employment or directorship" I seek your counsel, Mr Speaker—
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: International Affairs
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman just used the phrase "legal certainty" in referring to our departure from the EU on 29 March 2019. Does that mean that he has seen legal advice that article 50 cannot be revoked? Is the Labour Front-Bench position that it is impossible, as opposed to politically inexpedient, to consider revoking article 50?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: International Affairs
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): For the avoidance of doubt, I will repeat what I have said in this place before: I think we have to accept the views of the people of England and Wales who have expressed a wish to leave the European Union. Unless the people of those nations give a contrary view at some future point, that view has to be respected Some 62% of my people voted to stay in the EU. I want to hear just a single word from this Government that indicates they are prepared to change anything in their chaotic Brexit plan to recognise the sovereign will of the people of Scotland and, indeed, the majority of people in Northern Ireland who also voted to remain. Half the member states of this Union voted to remain in the EU, and there has been no recognition whatever of that fact from the UK Government so far. They have even shown their contempt: having promised to table amendments to correct yet another deficiency in the Bill on the impact on the devolved nations, they then changed their minds and are going to leave it to the other place, where nobody is elected or has any democratic mandate to do anything The Government’s woeful handling of Brexit from day one demonstrates that they are so incompetent that they do not even trust themselves to know what is a state secret and what is very common knowledge. It would be wrong for this House to hand over to a competent, cohesive Government the draconian powers contained in the Bill. It would be criminally negligent to hand them over to a Government so disorganised that they could not even appoint their own party chairman without announcing the appointment of the wrong person While the SNP’s main purpose has been to scrutinise and seek to improve the proposal from the Government, it has to be said—it hurts me greatly to do so—that the performance of Her Majesty’s official Opposition to date has left a great deal to be desired. We are seeing signs of improvement, which I warmly welcome, on membership of the single market and the customs union. The right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer) has very helpfully tweeted recently reminders of the six red lines that his party had set out last year. The hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook) referred to them earlier The second of those red lines is whether the deal delivers the "exact same benefits" as we currently have as members of the single market and customs union. The only way that that red line can be satisfied is if we remain in the single market and the customs union. I hope that in the intervening period since he sent that tweet, the right hon. and learned Gentleman and his colleagues have managed to persuade the Leader of the Opposition that it is time to get down off the fence and to stop doing the Tories’ work for them and time for every Labour MP in this House to go through the Lobby to vote for this amendment to keep our place in the single market.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: International Affairs
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend talks about the principal Opposition party—by number, that is. Is he aware that in the past year, for five months they supported the single market, for five months they were against the single market, for two months they were uncertain, and sadly there were only two months—July and August—where they had a consistent policy without alternating every other month?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: Foreign Trade
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As I said, I have been disappointed in the performance of the official Opposition up until now. I think we are seeing some signs of cohesion, and quite a number of speakers have been very firm in favouring the single market, as indeed we have heard across the House I do not want to point out mistakes that have been made in the past or score political points. There is a time and a place for that. The situation that we will face within the next couple of hours is so important and could have such devastating consequences for all our constituents that how about, just for a couple of hours, we forget the mistakes that each other has made and look at the catastrophic mistake that we may be about to make if we allow the Bill to go through without amendment 59 or something similar being passed? This may be the last chance we have to keep ourselves away from the cliff edge. I say to all those in this House, regardless of their party allegiance, who know that the single market and the customs union is where we have to be, please come through the Lobby with us tonight to vote to make sure that that happens.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-17
Topic: Macroeconomics
Thomas Sheppard (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Given the shortage of time, I will confine my remarks to amendment 59 I find it almost unbelievable that, 18 months after the referendum and six months after the Government introduced this Bill, they still have not provided or commissioned any proper economic analysis of what Brexit will mean and of the various options we have. In that information vacuum, it has fallen to others to try to fill the gap. A recent report from the Mayor of London concluded that 500,000 jobs are at risk as £50 billion will be taken out of the economy. The Fraser of Allander Institute in Scotland, which is no friend of my party or of the Scottish Government, has concluded that Brexit puts 80,000 jobs in Scotland under threat. Just this week, a new analysis from the Scottish Government concluded that each person in Scotland could lose £2,600 if we leave the single market If the Government disagree with those analyses, I have to wonder why they do not publish their own. I understand that the Government are, of course, divided at the highest level—God knows they need to find agreement among themselves before they can get agreement with other countries—but that cannot be the whole explanation I believe the reason we have not had this analysis from the Government is that they know anything they publish will not support and provide evidence for the path they have chosen. Given that degree of denial and political myopia, it falls to this Parliament to try to save this Government from themselves. We can do that by supporting amendment 59, because the truth is that there are no good options here, only less bad ones. Clearly, the least bad option we can do is remain in the customs union and single market to protect our economy. The time has come to call a halt on what is happening and say, "This is the direction we must go in." As the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) mentioned, this amendment has the backing of four parties. It is almost a united Opposition amendment, but there is an absentee friend—the Labour party. I say to Labour colleagues, even at this eleventh hour, not to chastise them but to welcome them in this campaign, "Don’t just participate. Come and lead the campaign against this Government. If you do not, you compromise the future." In a few years’ time, when the consequences are clear, prices are going up and jobs are disappearing, the Leader of the Opposition will try to accuse the Government and they will look back and say, "You didn’t stop it at the time." So I ask Labour colleagues to come with us and back amendment 59, and let us try to save this Government from themselves.
Community Transport: Licensing — House of Commons, 2018-01-18
Topic: Transportation
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for his answer. He will be aware that the proposal is estimated to cost the industry £37 million and each driver £1,500. It rather seems like the Government have taken a sledgehammer to crack a nut. What does the Minister say to Shotts’ Getting Better Together in my constituency, which provides essential community transport services, yet has no interest in being a commercial entity and could be lost to the community under these plans?
Transport Infrastructure: the North — House of Commons, 2018-01-18
Topic: Transportation
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I welcome the Minister to his post. On his opening remarks, may I remind him that there is a north beyond the northern powerhouse, and it is called Scotland? In general, in order to deliver high-quality, reliable rail services, funding needs to be based on the needs of the sector, taking account of future growth, the size of the network and essential maintenance. Does he agree with those sound principles?
Transport Infrastructure: the North — House of Commons, 2018-01-18
Topic: Transportation
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On the principles I was trying to lay out, Scotland has 17% of the UK rail network but was allocated only 10.4% of the UK spend. The Government regulator, the Office of Rail and Road, has stated that £1.9 billion is needed for essential repairs and £2.3 billion is needed to meet future demand. So why was the funding formula cut and why were experts ignored, leaving Scotland with a £600 million shortfall?
Select Committee on International Development — House of Commons, 2018-01-18
Topic: International Affairs
Christopher Murray Alexander Law (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The report is clear in highlighting where the UK Government have been slow to act. I hope they have been listening and, in particular, will now allow these 70 experts in gender-based violence to get out there as soon as possible. Does the Chair agree, however, that particular attention must be given to a clear and decisive plan for repatriation, not just on security and safety but on the legal status of every Rohingya who voluntarily goes back to Burma, and that the international development agencies need to have oversight at each and every stage?
Leaving the EU: Legal Systems — House of Commons, 2018-01-23
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.; What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I welcome the new Secretary of State to his position, having shadowed him for a few months when he was Secretary of State for Work and Pensions The UK Government’s position papers on judicial co-operation in civil matters, data protection and judicial oversight have been dismissed by EU interlocutors as unsatisfactory, due to their lack of realism and detail. Does the Secretary of State intend to respond to that by producing more realistic and detailed proposals?
Leaving the EU: Legal Systems — House of Commons, 2018-01-23
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.; What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Secretary of State has acknowledged Scotland’s distinct legal and judicial system. The role of Lord Advocate in overseeing the investigation and prosecution of crime means that, in Scotland, there is direct co-operation between Scottish law enforcement agencies and their European counterparts. Will the Minister give details of the consultations between his Department, and the Scottish Government and Scottish Law Officers in that regard?
Leaving the EU: Legal Systems — House of Commons, 2018-01-23
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.; What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I welcome the new Secretary of State for Justice to his place. Sir David Edward, a distinguished former judge in Scotland and at the European Court of Justice, has said that so far "the UK Government has overlooked the significance of the separate Scottish legal system, the Scottish judicial system and the Scottish prosecution system in relation to justice and home affairs issues" in their negotiations with the EU. Will the new Secretary of State undertake to meet me to discuss how those oversights might be rectified?
Leaving the EU: Legal Systems — House of Commons, 2018-01-23
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.; What assessment his Department has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the operation of the legal system in each legal jurisdiction in the UK.
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Secretary of State for agreeing to meet me, but that was not my characterisation; it was the characterisation of a senior judge in the Scottish courts and in the Court of Justice. The judge went on to describe the UK Government’s paper on enforcement and dispute resolution as "an undergraduate essay which would have failed" He says that those who are writing the papers are not aware of the problems posed by the separate Scottish legal system and that they do not want to hear from the experts who have offered to help. This is a serious problem. Will the Secretary of State, in his new role, undertake to listen to those who know about the Scottish legal system and to take on board their concerns in his negotiations on these matters?