argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Royal Bank of Scotland — House of Commons, 2015-11-05
Topic: Domestic Commerce
George Kerevan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I associate myself with the comments from hon. Members congratulating the hon. Member for Edmonton (Kate Osamor) on securing the debate. The advantage of having this debate is that we have moved the agenda forward, rather than looking back. Yes, we have castigated and held RBS to account, but the Minister should also note that Members on both sides of the House want to move the banking agenda forward We have spent seven or eight years, in the Treasury Committee and in the House, trying to refashion the regulatory machinery. In fact, the new regulatory machinery is yet to come into force, because it will be another two years before most of Vickers and the ring-fencing is in force, and another four years before it is fully operational. That means that we will have spent more than a decade trying to sort out the problems of 2007, and when we get there, we will discover that economic and banking problems have moved forward. Therefore, the advantage of today’s debate is that we have tried to start moving the agenda beyond 2007. I think that the Government should bear that in mind. That is why the motion, despite being drafted in very general terms, expresses the will of the House, which is that we need to look forward at how we can make the banking system more responsive, rather than simply protecting it from replicating the previous bubble I associate myself with the words of the hon. Member for Horsham (Jeremy Quin) and my hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Dr Monaghan). In criticising the strategy pursued by various managements of RBS, which hopefully was largely in the past, we should never extend the criticism to the work done by the ordinary workers in the branches and call centres. They have struggled to cope with the crisis of 2007-08, and with the various restructurings that have taken place. I remind Members that employment in RBS was around 200,000 when it was taken into public ownership, and now it is about 92,000, so there has been a massive shedding of labour.
Royal Bank of Scotland — House of Commons, 2015-11-05
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): It is interesting that my hon. Friend is referring to the challenges that some of the staff at Royal Bank of Scotland have faced. They are fully deserving of our support. Does he agree that we should reflect on the employees of RBS and other banks who were encouraged by their managements to own shares pre-the crisis, and who, among others, have suffered parlously from the mistakes by those managements?
Royal Bank of Scotland — House of Commons, 2015-11-05
Topic: Domestic Commerce
George Kerevan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I will not take another intervention, because I am mindful of the time The Government have to rethink the idea of extending the new bank surcharge, which they have applied to the larger banks, to the smaller banks and mutuals. If we want to strengthen the mutual stakeholder section, we need to reduce the bank surcharge on it There is a growing issue—we have not mentioned this today, but it is beginning to emerge in the banking community—of access to the interlink payment system that binds together all the banks. The electronic system, which relates to cashline machines, standing order payments and contactless payments in a shop, is commonly owned by the big banks, but it is very difficult for smaller banks, new challenger banks and, ultimately, stakeholder banks to access it. We need to open it up. Finally, we need to open up the pricing structure so that SMEs can see how much it costs them to run accounts with a bank Members on both sides of the House have collectively offered suggestions to the Government. There should be no rush to judgment. Let us think about what we are doing. RBS must have a customer-led focus and we should not just look at what the Treasury wants to do in order to get its money back.
Off-patent Drugs Bill — House of Commons, 2015-11-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
Philippa Whitford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I find it bizarre that the right hon. Gentleman says that we must not bring in this change because it would undermine access to other drugs, because that tends to suggest that we should not have any licensing at all. Why is he happy to have drugs licensed but also feels that we should have unlicensed drugs?
Off-patent Drugs Bill — House of Commons, 2015-11-06
Topic: Other
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you give us some guidance? Given the feelings being expressed throughout the Chamber, what can we do to move a closure motion so that the views of the House can be expressed properly in this debate?
Off-patent Drugs Bill — House of Commons, 2015-11-06
Topic: Other
Patrick John Grady (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Given what you have said, let the record show that at least 13 Scottish National party Members have given up their Fridays in their constituencies to come here on behalf of their constituents. This is an outrageous abuse of parliamentary procedure.
Research and Development — House of Commons, 2015-10-27
Topic: Mixed Topics
Callum McCaig (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Government’s record on R and D does not match their rhetoric. Only yesterday, some of the leading companies in the United Kingdom expressed the fear that the Government’s reported plan to replace R and D tax credits with interest-paying loans could hit R and D investment and send it abroad. Will the Minister reassure Parliament and business that R and D grants will continue to be made available to help our businesses to innovate and remain competitive?
Tax Credits — House of Commons, 2015-10-27
Topic: Other
Martin John Docherty-Hughes (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. It seems that the House of Lords—the unelected, unaccountable, bloated Chamber through the other side of the doors—is causing some angst today. Will you forgive my ignorance as a new Member, Mr Speaker, and highlight to me and many of my Scottish National party colleagues why, while we cannot vote on some issues in this House, the unelected and unaccountable barons and baronesses of the Scottish peerage will be able to vote on them in the other?
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-27
Topic: Mixed Topics
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I welcome my hon. Friend’s contribution. As we are talking about affordability and sustainability, let me say that the Government think it feasible to press ahead with apparently £167 billion of Trident nuclear weapons, which is shocking and deplorable, while seeing fit to find £4.4 billion of cuts in tax credits. They are taking an ideological wrecking ball to our social security system in the name of a budget surplus by scandalously waging a war on low-income households.
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-27
Topic: Mixed Topics
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): We understand, from survey after survey, that millions of people in this country are going to be worse off as a result of these measures. What is the hon. Gentleman going to say to his constituents who come to him after next April having lost on average £1,300 of their income?
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-27
Topic: Other
Hannah Mary Bardell (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If we as parliamentarians are in this place to legislate for those we represent, let us legislate well and with compassion and good conscience. The proposals do not make good legislation. They are wrong for our society and wrong for this generation, so I ask Members to think again and vote with us.
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-10-27
Topic: Mixed Topics
Eilidh Whiteford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I will not give way, because time is very short Those measures will drive disincentives to work and will compromise economic recovery. Above all, they will push hundreds of thousands of bairns into poverty. The benefit cap fails to tackle the underlying issue of an out-of-control housing market and a lack of affordable housing, and it hits those living in our most expensive urban areas. Cuts to employment and support allowance penalise people with serious and long-term illnesses and disabilities, and, to add insult to injury, stigmatise people for their own poor health. On sanctions, we have heard that the Government’s U-turn fails to address the need for a proper review of the sanctions regime. Those are the wrong choices to make. There is a responsible path to deficit reduction. There is a responsible alternative to austerity, and this Bill is not it However, we did not get a chance to debate the amendments in the third group this afternoon, so I wish to put it on the record that I welcome Government amendments 2 to 16, which take into account the concerns raised by the Scottish Government and other devolved Administrations This is a deeply regressive Bill. It harms low-income households and makes disadvantaged people carry the can of the Government’s economic failure. The SNP will oppose the Bill tonight.
Sure Start — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Mixed Topics
Carol Frances Monaghan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Scottish Government have announced plans to extend free childcare to 30 hours a week for all three and four-year-olds. As the Minister will know, that is more ambitious than his plans to extend provision only to families in which both parents work. Does he not recognise that by restricting free childcare in that way, the UK Government are missing an opportunity to tackle inequalities by targeting early-learning provision at more disadvantaged families?
Departmental Board (Gender Balance) — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Civil Rights
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Last week, my hon. Friend the Member for Lanark and Hamilton East (Angela Crawley) exposed the Government’s appalling record on this issue, revealing that only 68 of a total of 200 members of departmental boards are women, with only two women on the Secretary of State’s own board. Will she agree to seek an urgent meeting with Scotland’s First Minister to learn from her of the Scottish Government’s success in not only achieving a gender-balanced departmental board, but making the Scottish Cabinet one of only three gender-balanced Cabinets in the world?
Departmental Board (Gender Balance) — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Civil Rights
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Secretary of State is also the Minister for Women and Equalities. Is she embarrassed at the lack of gender balance on the DFE’s board? Can she explain what steps she will take to rectify this situation, which does nothing to advance the cause of women or equalities?
Contaminated Blood — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Other
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): First, may I ask the Minister to take this opportunity to apologise to my constituents, who are very upset that the statement was made in the other place on Friday afternoon? Does he also acknowledge that these delays—indeed, any delays on this issue—compound the original error, and can he assure the House that we will be updated regularly so that all Members can represent their constituents on this matter?
Counter-ISIL Coalition Strategy — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Is not the Secretary of State aware that his obligations under the ministerial code are not just to answer freedom of information requests, but to be straight with the House of Commons? Will he confirm that successive British Governments have made it clear that embedded personnel have to conform to rules of engagement, including the ambit of operations? How in this case is that consistent with a specific instruction from the House not to be involved in air strikes in Syria?
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Mixed Topics
Martin John Docherty-Hughes (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Will the shadow Secretary of State join me in recognising the unpardonable folly of these proposals and their impact on the entire islands of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? Does he agree that that is felt not only on the front line by children and women but by the staff of the DWP, who in Glasgow and Bolton are considering strike action because of the effects of these proposals and the stress that they are under?
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Mixed Topics
Elizabeth Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I assume the hon. Gentleman knows that the Institute for Fiscal Studies has noted that it is "arithmetically impossible" for the increase in the minimum wage to "provide full compensation for the majority of losses experienced by tax credit" —and universal credit— "recipients." Is it the members of the IFS who need to go back to school, or is it the hon. Gentleman?
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Mixed Topics
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Does the hon. Gentleman not understand that the very firm view in Scotland is that those additional costs are a price well worth paying if they give us the fair and just society each and every one of us was elected to deliver?
Welfare Reform and Work Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-20
Topic: Other
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. As the neutral arbiter of this House, is there any way in which you could help and advise me on how we can achieve this? Can we rearrange the furniture of this House so that the SNP becomes the official Opposition while the Labour party abstains on the Back Benches?
Tax Credits — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: What estimate he has made of the number of people who will receive a net reduction in income as a result of the policies on tax credits announced in the summer Budget 2015.
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The consequence of this Budget is that 1.8 million women in low-paid work across the UK will lose an average of just over £1,000 a year over the next five years. Cuts to child and working tax credits will hit 2.8 million women in total, two-thirds of those affected. Why is it that this Government’s policies are having a disproportionately negative impact on this country’s women?
DWP Data — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): With all due respect to the Minister, she has not answered the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Chris Stephens) and the hon. Member for St Helens South and Whiston (Marie Rimmer). Will she appeal the Information Commissioner’s decision? Will the data be backdated to November 2011? Given that 200,000 people, including many of my constituents, have signed a petition calling for the data to be published, will there be parliamentary time to scrutinise it?
DWP Data — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Other
Natalie McGarry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Given some of the Minister’s replies today, it is clear that she likes repetition, and now I am going to copy her. Will she please answer the question that has been asked by my hon. Friends, and tell us whether she will appeal against the decision?
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Patrick John Grady (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The International Monetary Fund recently said that developing countries lose £212 billion a year through corporate tax avoidance by multinational companies. Transparency will be absolutely crucial in dealing with that, but the Bill makes no mention of public country-by-country reporting. Will the Government look carefully at that, and at any amendments that might come forward, given that it would enable people in the developing world to see the taxes that companies pay locally for their benefit?
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
George Kerevan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): In the shift to the new tax on banks, the Government are sweeping in mutual banks, building societies and the smaller challenger banks. That creates problems both in capital accumulation for the mutuals and in the ability of the new challenger banks effectively to gain capital to take on the larger banks. Is that an accident, or has some decision been taken to penalise those organisations?
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Michelle Rhonda Thomson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree with concerns expressed by the British Insurance Brokers Association, which stated that the rise in IPT is actually a tax on protection and will affect behaviour by limiting people from taking on that protection? It also states that that will affect young people disproportionately, and it is regressive in that it disproportionately affects families in lower socio- economic groups.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
William Arthur Roger Mullin (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Absolutely, and I am glad my hon. Friend raised a matter that I will come to shortly. Investment is critical for productivity in this country I am struck by how the detail of the Finance Bill suggests that, rather than addressing key issues in a positive manner, the Government present some highly counterproductive measures on productivity. I and my colleagues initially welcomed some of the changes to the banking levy and the introduction of a surcharge. However, whether through carelessness or incompetence—what I am about to say surely could not be planned—the scope of the changes now captures both challenger banks and many building societies whose practices are very different from those of the big banks. Challenger banks already face additional hurdles compared with the big banks, and as the British Bankers Association has pointed out: "The surcharge’s disproportionate effect on smaller and challenger banks was evidenced by the resulting fall in their share prices following the announcement, in some instances of over 10%." Of more concern to me and my colleagues is that the BBA has estimated that: "Our preliminary analysis based on modest growth projections across the sector suggests that the contraction in lending could be around £10 billion over five years" If there is anything we do not need when trying to boost productivity, it is a contraction in lending, particularly for SMEs. If that was to be the only drag on productivity it would be bad enough, but let me turn to another.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Other
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): It will be a very short intervention. My hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Mr MacNeil) is well enough versed in the procedure of this House to know that this is a debate on a Finance Bill and could potentially go until any hour, if he wanted to extend his interventions or speeches.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I fully support what the hon. Lady is saying, and she had no less an authority than Tim Harford in the Financial Times writing, about seven or eight weeks ago, on exactly the same point. He highlighted how Sweden has done exactly what she is describing: enabled women to go back into the workplace, to develop their skills and to go further—and of course this yielded higher taxes—unlike in the UK, where they decide to stay at home and the taxman and mothers lose out.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Other
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am grateful for the opportunity, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have been here for some substantial time in this debate—not for the opening speeches, but longer than just about any Labour or Conservative Member, apart from those on the two Front Benches. Indeed, I was here when the total number of Labour and Conservative Members present was in single figures. I am well aware of the rules of the House, Madam Deputy Speaker—[Interruption.]
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Other
Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I just point out that it is not immediately obvious to Members that a Second Reading debate on the Finance Bill will not be able to fulfil its time slot—they are not aware of that at the start of a debate? But, Madam Deputy Speaker, may I say that, as ever, your ruling has been most gracefully made, and therefore will be most gracefully accepted.
Delegated Legislation — House of Commons, 2015-07-21
Topic: Other
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker—excellent pronunciation, yet again. On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Following the point of order last night from my hon. Friend the Member for Perth and North Perthshire (Pete Wishart) asking that the furniture be altered in this House so that the real Opposition could actually be in a place of opposition, is it in order that the party should change the seating instead, so that the actual Opposition—the SNP 56—sit in the right place, in opposition to the Tory party?
Immigration Detention — House of Commons, 2015-09-10
Topic: Immigration
Stewart Malcolm McDonald (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Does the hon. Lady agree with the point I raised earlier—that the Border Agency must start to work better with elected Members of the devolved Administrations and allow them to represent constituents in the same way that she and I can represent them?
Sustainable Development Goals — House of Commons, 2015-09-10
Topic: Immigration
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I agree with the hon. Gentleman’s comments about some of the reasons why people in parts of Africa want to migrate to Europe. Was it deliberate or an oversight not to mention the idea that some or most of those people are migrating here to take advantage of the benefit system? Did he not mention that because he knows it is not the case?