argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Household Debt — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: One trend that alarms me is the false advertising of consumer credit rates. Despite having a perfect credit rating, according to Experian, I was told that M&S Bank would not give me the advertised rate that was supposedly being offered to 51% of its customers. What is the Minister doing to ensure that the Financial Conduct Authority is robust in ensuring that advertised rates are made available to the majority of consumers?
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister acknowledge that the reasons why a quarter of people on low incomes are currently experiencing significant problems with arrears or debt repayment include, first, his Government not taking on board Labour’s programme to rein in credit card debt and, secondly, the fact that their changes to the tax threshold have been outweighed for the poorest people by alterations to social security?
Corporate Tax Evasion — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Emma Elizabeth Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): It is embarrassing for the Government that Carillion’s chairman is an adviser to the Prime Minister on corporate responsibility. Given the level of salaries and bonuses awarded to senior management at Carillion, as well as improving the response to corporate tax evasion what will the Government do to ensure better corporate governance in UK companies?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. and learned Gentleman is making a point that gets to the heart of the purpose of the Bill, as stated by the Government: this is a technical transfer exercise—it is technically transferring the acquis communautaire into British law to facilitate Brexit. Does not the decision not to transpose the charter of fundamental rights make a mockery of that claim? Although the right hon. and learned Gentleman is making very valid points about some of the technical alternatives, do we not need to keep returning the Government to their stated fundamental purpose in the Bill?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I see the Solicitor General nodding. On this crucial issue, however, the Government’s cover has been blown. For this, I would like to thank the new Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Fareham (Suella Fernandes) —I am sorry she is not in her place today—because in an article in The Daily Telegraph on 18 November last year she made our case clearly. She expressed her concern about the charter precisely because it provided new rights. She wrote that it went beyond the European convention on human rights by creating "extra layers of rights", and she went on to bemoan the fact that these extra rights covered "everything from biomedicine and eugenics to personal data and collective bargaining" I appreciate that her thinking on this will probably be in line with that of her new boss, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, because he relied of course on the extra rights provided by the charter when he brought his own court case against the now Prime Minister asserting his right to personal data.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is making a powerful case. In addition to the points he has just made, the Exiting the European Union Committee heard evidence from witnesses who said that something would be lost if the charter was not transferred. Given that the whole purpose of the Bill is to take the law as it is now and make sure it is still there the day after, does he agree that the Government have thus far failed to persuade the House that the one thing that should be left out is the charter of fundamental rights?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I agree absolutely with my right hon. Friend, and I hope even at this stage that Members across the House might join us in supporting amendment 4 I do not often agree with the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Fareham, but I am delighted to say that in this case I do. She is right that the charter does indeed go beyond the European convention on human rights and that EU retained law will be incoherent without it. Our amendment is necessary, therefore, if we are to achieve the Government’s own stated objective of protecting the rights of UK citizens. This is a crucial issue. The chair of the Government’s own Equality and Human Rights Commission, David Isaac, has said: "The government has promised there will be no rowing back on people’s rights after Brexit. If we lose the charter protections, that promise will be broken. It will cause legal confusion and there will be gaps in the law." These are serious concerns. Human rights should not be a dividing line across the House but should be seen as a British value, and I urge all Members who do not want Brexit hijacked and the rights of UK citizens diluted and reduced to support the amendment.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): These issues are very much to do with legal clarity. They are to do with ensuring that the body of our law can operate smoothly and with stability, and that the courts can properly interpret the way in which various rights will apply in the circumstances that our individual constituents may encounter You were not in the Chair during the Committee stage, Mr Speaker, but you may recall that we had some discussion about aspects of the charter of fundamental rights. Amendment 4, and amendment 7 tabled by members of the Scottish National party, makes the important point that, as we heard earlier from my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield), this is not a simple "copy and paste" piece of legislation. I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn): it seems very peculiar that the charter has been explicitly excluded from the carrying forward of rights. Ministers say, "Do not worry: all those matters are already covered", or "Common law can deal with them adequately", but I do not think that such verbal assurances are good enough, and evidence given to the Exiting the European Union Committee bears that out.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The Select Committee consists of Members in all parts of the House. Far be it from me to interfere with the way in which my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central manages—heaven knows how—to steer through a report compiled by a Committee that is not only august but enormous. Evidence was submitted, however, and I do not think that it can be swept away Let me remind the Committee what we are talking about when we refer to the Charter of Fundamental Rights. We are talking about rights that relate to "dignity, the right to life, to freedom from torture, slavery, the death penalty, eugenic practices and human cloning" We are talking about "freedoms, the right to liberty, personal integrity, privacy, protection of personal data"— which will be a massive issue when it arises later in our proceedings— "marriage, thought, religion, expression, assembly, education, work, property and asylum" We are talking about "equality, the right to equality before the law, prohibition of all discrimination including on the basis of disability, age and sexual orientation, cultural, religious and linguistic diversity, the rights of children and the elderly" Again, some of those rights are not necessarily enshrined in primary legislation, but have accrued because of our membership of the European Union over several decades. We are talking about "solidarity, the right to fair working conditions, protection against unjustified dismissal, and access to health care, social and housing assistance…citizens’ rights, the rights of citizens such as the right to vote in elections and to move freely, the right to good administration, to access documents and to petition Parliament" We are also talking about justiciable rights: "the right to an effective remedy, a fair trial, to the presumption of innocence, the principle of legality, non-retrospectivity and double jeopardy." We can all point to parts of existing UK law where many of those rights may be covered adequately, but other rights—particularly those relating to children and families and to social policy—are connected very much with EU law.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): No one is more proud of being a member of this fine body than I am. Parliament is a great institution: I would say that it is one of the greatest democratic institutions in the world. We are perfectly capable of dealing with many of these issues, but the hon. Gentleman unwittingly went against his own argument when he said "almost" all the rights in the charter were covered or duplicated in primary legislation. Not all of them are covered, as was made clear in some of the evidence that the Select Committee heard.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): Is there not a fundamental inconsistency here? The Government’s reason for not including the charter is that those rights are covered in domestic law, so it would not add anything, but they propose to include thousands of other directives and rules, many of which we would also be unlikely to change in domestic law. The very same argument could be applied to those thousands of other rules that the Bill goes out of its way to incorporate. The Government say, "We do not want to change the labour laws; we do not want to change the environmental rules; we do not want to change the consumer rights." However, they apply a different logic to the charter. Why does my hon. Friend think that is?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The logic of the Government is a mystery sometimes, and I wonder whether the Solicitor General actually secretly agrees that these are important rights that need to be defended and that the Government have got themselves into a bit of a pickle, possibly because they drafted this Bill before the general election and therefore before they saw some of the consequences of these things.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Peter John Kyle (Labour, Centre-left): Those of us who are gay, who went to school in the 1980s and who remember very well the impact of section 28 might baulk at the idea that every Government have given rights and not taken them away. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is a fundamental reason why we need to share and stay within the European Union and the fundamental rights system it provides?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That right of protection for freedoms and liberties on the grounds of sexual orientation is enshrined in the charter of fundamental rights. One of the examples given was civil partnerships where in the future pension rights might be divided but at the time when the partnerships took place certain UK laws were not in place; the charter provides protections against discrimination in a way that existing UK law does not.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is making a strong point and I strongly support what he is saying and Labour Front-Bench amendment 4. I accept that many Conservative Members would strongly defend the rights in the charter and other provisions we have agreed to, but does my hon. Friend agree that the public have reason to be deeply suspicious, because they hear many Conservative Members talk about a race to the bottom in regulation, particularly in employment rights, and about wanting to scrap the Human Rights Act and pull us out of the European convention on human rights? That is why keeping such rights is so crucial.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): That is right, and my hon. Friend will also remember that, before becoming Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis) cited many of the rights in the charter in his own legal case against the then Home Secretary, who is now the Prime Minister. The right hon. Gentleman took a case against her and cited many of the provisions in the charter; how strange it is that he now introduces a Bill that does not necessarily carry forward those provisions.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. Does he agree that the issue at hand is not whether those of us in this Chamber now might want to change the rights and protections we currently have, but the process by which those laws and rights could be changed and the ease and lack of accountability and transparency that could put them at risk in future?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): I can certainly imagine cases where our constituents, feeling the need to assert some of those rights in the charter in future, find themselves falling foul of the provision in clause 5 that says, all of a sudden, that the charter of fundamental rights is not part of domestic law on or after exit day. They enjoyed those rights hitherto; where would that situation leave them The Government, when being sued by the tobacco companies which did not like plain packaging and thought it was against their rights of expression, cited the right to public health in the charter of fundamental rights and managed to defeat those tobacco companies. The charter of fundamental rights proved important not just for our constituents, but for the Government themselves in upholding what was a good piece of public policy at the time.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Other
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): I am sure that advice will have been heard in senior quarters. Indeed a vice-chair of the Conservative party, the hon. Member for Braintree (James Cleverly), is sitting on the row in front of the right hon. Lady. He is a very senior and eminent individual now, who has great responsibility for digging the Conservative party out of quite a deep hole.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Who knows what will happen in terms of future majorities in this place. The hon. Gentleman is still not explaining to me why this issue of all the issues should not be carried forward into legislation. He says he is in favour of almost all or all, of the rights in the charter, but we know there are examples where problems arise.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Lady’s legal experience speaks volumes about the issue. Simply explaining that one is in favour of these rights, having Members on the Conservative Benches say "They are all really important", saying that in leaflets and posting them through letterboxes at elections, and having Ministers at the Dispatch Box saying, "Trust us, it’s all fine" cannot provide the solid protections that our constituents need in a court of law, whereas the charter of fundamental rights can currently do that.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): As it happens, since that time we have learned that the charter provides extremely important protections for many citizens. I do not think the Government would have cited it in legal actions against the tobacco companies if it were such an unimportant protection.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): I am worried. The right hon. Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry) was saying to her hon. Friends, "Be careful because our constituents do care about rights." She said in particular that younger people care about rights. They really do matter. They may not matter to them in their daily lives today, but they may matter to them or their family or relatives or the environment tomorrow. Those are all things our constituents care about.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): If that were the right way, the Government would have introduced a Bill to provide such certainty, instead of saying, "Mañana. Maybe at some point in the future we will try to close this loophole." We have the Trade Bill now, as well as the Nuclear Safeguards Bill and a customs Bill. We are supposed to have an immigration Bill at some point, although I suspect that the Government are having a few difficulties figuring out how to bring it forward. These Bills are supposed to be the fundamental underpinnings of the copy-and-paste process that the Government are pursuing. They are supposed to be taking aspects of European Union rules and regulations and ensuring that they will still be here after March 2019, but no Bill relating to the charter of fundamental rights has been brought forward.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Lady makes a very good point. In relation to specific issues relating to Brexit, the Government are finding, when the rubber hits the road, not only that there are potential problems such as the one relating to an American trade deal but that an awful lot of their constituents are saying, "Hang on a minute, what exactly are you doing about animal rights issues? Where will we be when we exit from these particular provisions?"
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Treaties are reformed every time there are adaptations to them, whether it is Maastricht, Nice or Lisbon. The body of European rules and regulations is adapted and reformed all the time. It is all part of working together in co-operation. Sometimes we get our way on particular issues; sometimes we have to continue to argue our case. That is the nature of pooling some of our rules and sharing sovereignty in some respects with our wider neighbours. That is the nature of agriculture and of the environment in which we live.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my hon. Friend for giving way; he is being very generous. Does he recognise that people are suspicious given that, for example, the new Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Fareham (Suella Fernandes), who has just joined us in the Chamber, said that the Government were right not to copy the charter of fundamental rights into UK law because lawyers will love the extra rights that it gives? That shows the real intention behind what some Ministers want, which is to bring down the rights that have protected so many people and workers, the environment, and safety.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Other
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): I congratulate the hon. Member for Fareham (Suella Fernandes) on her appointment, but I am very much looking forward to her speech, which will perhaps wind up one of the sections of this debate, because Parliament will want to scrutinise her views, past and present. I will conclude with that because I have taken up more than half an hour and other Members will want to contribute.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Other
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. and learned Gentleman is making an excellent speech. Does he agree that this is the sort of amendment that the other place might just take to heart and bounce back, so it might be more sensible to have that difficult pain now and get it out of the way, and the other House will not have to return it?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Civil Rights
Charalambos Charalambous (Labour, Centre-left): I will be supporting amendment 57 and other provisions. I rise to speak to new clause 16, which is in my name. I will not be pushing it to a vote, because it is a probing provision The new clause seeks to ensure that there is no regression in our equality protection as we leave the EU and following the repeal of the charter of fundamental rights. That principle has already been agreed by the Government, so there should be little controversy about supporting new clause 16. Hon. Members were promised that the Government would introduce an amendment that required Ministers, on the presentation of any Brexit-related primary or secondary legislation, to make a statement before the House on whether and how it was consistent with the Equality Act 2010. While the Government may try to make out that amendment 391 covers that point, I do not believe that it properly addresses the issue of primary legislation—a point eloquently made by the right hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve) For that reason, I have tabled new clause 16. We cannot allow any regression in, or diminishing of, our equality protections and rights when we leave the EU. I totally disagree with hon. Members who have suggested that we should just trust the Government to get this right. The equality protections and human rights referred to in new clause 16 have been hard fought for, and we cannot allow them to be put at risk. I commend new clause 16 to the House.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Other
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): It seems to me, and I am sure the hon. and learned Lady will agree, that as far as the Government are concerned, "appropriate" means, "We’ll tell you what we’re going to bring in front of you."
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Other
Anna Rhiannon McMorrin (Labour, Centre-left): I am aware that discussions are taking place, but I am also aware that the UK Government promised to bring forward an amendment at this stage but have not done so. So where is that trust?
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-01-16
Topic: Mixed Topics
Anna Rhiannon McMorrin (Labour, Centre-left): We did table amendments, but the Government voted against them I cannot possibly accept that the UK Government will decide all new policies for all the nations of the UK on issues that are devolved, when they are also acting as the English Government. English interests are not always the same as Welsh or Scottish interests. We know all too well that English interests come first. Wales voted for a devolved Government 20 years ago. I was part of the campaign, and I was proud to see the then UK Labour Government bring that about.