argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-07
Topic: Law and Crime
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Very briefly, I was surprised that there was reference to police authorities when they were abolished by the Government some time ago. I guess that that is what comes when Bills are hastily drafted. I have one question for the Minister, which relates back to the issue of Scottish bodies that will be covered by the Bill. Currently, they are not listed anywhere. When will we have a list of the Scottish bodies that are covered?
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-07
Topic: Law and Crime
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): I beg to move amendment 3, page 22, line 14, leave out subsection (1) and insert— ‘(1) The Secretary of State shall by regulations made by statutory instrument establish a body to— (a) provide advice and assistance to the persons appointed under— (i) section 36(1) of the Terrorism Act 2006; (ii) section 31(1) of the Terrorist Asset-Freezing &c. Act 2010; and (iii) section 20(1) of the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 in the discharge of their statutory functions (b) review the operation, effectiveness and implications of the Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001, the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, [this Act] and any other law or prerogative power to the extent that it relates to counter-terrorism; (c) consider whether such legislation contains appropriate safeguards, is proportionate and remains necessary; (d) review intelligence-sharing guidance and practice to the extent that it relates to counter-terrorism and the functions of the Board; (e) make recommendations to any public authority about the exercise of its statutory functions relating to the prevention of terrorism; (f) undertake inquiries relating to counter-terrorism when invited to do so by the Home Secretary, the Treasury or the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, or on the initiative of the Board; (g) encourage good practice in the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of terrorism; (h) provide advice and assistance to Government on the development and implementation of policy relating to the prevention of terrorism." This expands the remit of the body to match that which is described in the Government’s Terms of Reference for this body.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-07
Topic: Law and Crime
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): No doubt the Minister will be able to confirm that. My understanding is that the level of information and intelligence given to the board will mean that its members will have to undergo appropriate vetting to make sure that they are suitable. Perhaps the Minister will comment on that The amendments would give the board a proper remit, with members appointed on merit, procedures for agreeing a work plan and access to the relevant information. Finally, amendment 2 would give the board a name that matches the role that we envisage for it—the counter terrorism oversight panel.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-07
Topic: Law and Crime
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Perhaps the matter can be discussed further in another place. "Counter terrorism oversight panel", the name that we have suggested, best describes the role that we envisage for the body As I have stressed, these amendments do not seek to do anything radical. They aim to ensure that the legislation matches what the Government have previously committed to do, and they ensure that what is in the Bill goes some way to addressing the concerns raised by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. The amendments are not overly prescriptive; they leave plenty room for the detail to be spelled out in secondary legislation, but they would ensure that that secondary legislation was meaningful as it related to the provisions of the Bill. I hope the Minister will seriously consider accepting the amendments.
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-07
Topic: Government Operations
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): There is a question about the board’s name, and I hope that that will be considered in the other place. I am interested to hear about the consultation on its membership. On the basis of what the Minister has said about this group of amendments, I will not press them, but we will want to return to them in the other place. I beg to ask leave to withdraw amendment 3 Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 38 Power to make consequential provision
Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill — House of Commons, 2015-01-07
Topic: Government Operations
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment 1, page 23, line 31, at end insert— "(4A) The Secretary of State must consult with Welsh Ministers before making provisions under subsection (1) so far as relating to any Measure or Act of the National Assembly of Wales (4B) The Secretary of State must consult with Scottish Ministers before making provisions under subsection (1) so far as relating any Act or instrument of the Scottish Parliament (4C) The Secretary of State must consult with the Northern Ireland Executive before making provisions under subsection (1) so far as relating to any Act or instrument of the Northern Ireland Assembly." This would ensure that the Secretary of State could not amend legislation from the Scottish Parliament or Welsh Assembly or Northern Ireland Assembly without first consulting with the Scottish or Welsh Governments or the Northern Ireland Executive.
Police and Crime Commissioners/Police Oversight — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
Nicholas Hugh Brown (Labour, Centre-left): How will these arrangements work in the north-east of England, which has one economic zone—incorporating Durham, Northumberland and Tyne and Wear—but two police authorities and two police and crime commissioners? Does the Home Office propose to merge the police authorities and their commissioners or to transfer their functions to a new individual?
Police and Crime Commissioners/Police Oversight — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
John Francis Spellar (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister recognise that the police and crime commissioners can work only within the resources and policy frameworks that are set nationally? Will he take this opportunity to support community policing and to reject the ridiculous suggestion from Tom Winsor that the police should ignore offences such as shoplifting and antisocial behaviour?
Mental Health — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): Police officers locally tell me that because of the cuts they are being used far too frequently as the service of last resort because the other services are just not there to step into the breach. Distressed family members have come to me when they are worried about the behaviour of their relatives, who they fear might harm themselves or someone else, but they really do not want to go to the police. What is the Home Secretary doing to ensure that the police are absolutely used only as a last resort and that other agencies are there to step in?
Crime Levels — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
Steven Mark Ward Reed (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister does not have much to say about card crime, which is up by a quarter, or online banking fraud, which is up by 71%. More and more people shop online, particularly over Christmas and the new year, but Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary found that just 2% of police had any training in cybercrime. When will the Government stop being so complacent about crime that is still rising?
Lincolnshire Police Budget — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
Robert Charles Douglas Flello (Labour, Centre-left): With more than 8,000 front-line police officers out of 16,000 cut already, is not the Lincolnshire chief constable right to warn that the loss of a further 6,000 front-line officers, along with other cuts, will simply mean that police forces across the country will collapse? They will go and there will not be any need for PCCs because there will not be any forces.
Lincolnshire Police Budget — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
John Eugene Joseph Dromey (Labour, Centre-left): Like many other chief constables around the country, the chief constable of an efficient and effective police service in Lincolnshire has made it clear that the Government’s proposed cuts will see meaningful neighbourhood policing ceased; response times get longer; officer safety put at risk; the ability to investigate historical child sex exploitation cases limited; and public confidence in policing severely eroded. Is he right to say that and is it right for the Home Secretary to spend £50 million on next year’s PCC elections when what the public want is for that money to be invested in front-line policing?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: Will the Minister join me in congratulating the Metropolitan police on a 14% reduction in crime over the past five years, and a 4% reduction in the last year alone? Does he agree that outer-London boroughs such as Havering need resources, as well as central London?; A recent study by the university of Bedfordshire and Victim Support found that one third of 11 to 17-year-olds have suffered physical violence in the past year. Will the Minister make it a priority to ensure that young people are taught how to report crimes and are fully supported throughout the process?; I welcome the Government’s extra funds to support victims of sexual abuse, but will my right hon. Friend outline exactly how we will do that?; There has been a net loss of 293 police officers from the Cleveland police service since 2010, and our police commissioner says that the budget has been cut by another 5.1%, which could further jeopardise public safety. Does the Home Secretary agree that such losses and cuts are the reasons behind the drop in confidence in policing for the first time in a decade?; Does the Home Secretary share my concern at the rise in rural crime, some of it organised, some of it opportunistic? Will she take this opportunity to make rural crime a target for police activity, so that action is taken to stamp it out?; Considering the warning that Tony Robinson has been given about his obligations under the Official Secrets Act, what guarantee can the Home Secretary give that other special branch officers, former special branch officers and others with knowledge of prominent people and historical child abuse will be able to speak out without such obstructions again?; I listened carefully to the Home Secretary’s earlier answers on immigration, but may I ask her to ensure that efforts to curb immigration will not harm our higher education system or deny British businesses access to skills that they can find only internationally as a result of any new restrictions on visas for graduates at British universities?
Julie Hilling (Labour, Centre-left): A growing number of my constituents are victims of cyber-crime, but they complain that they hear nothing once the crime has been reported to Action Fraud. As the Minister could not tell me how many successful prosecutions there were for cyber-crime or what proportion of cases reported to Action Fraud were investigated, how can we have any confidence in the crime figures and what will she do to ensure that cyber-crimes are properly investigated and prosecuted?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Michael Dugher (Labour, Centre-left): In his new year message, the Prime Minister said that Britain faced a choice between competence or chaos. Ministers at the Department for Transport clearly did not get the memo, because at Christmas we saw both chaos and incompetence on our rail network, resulting in misery for passengers who have seen their fares rocket by more than 20% since 2010—three times faster than the growth of wages. The recent chaos all started with the Secretary of State’s decision to allow a near shutdown of train services on Boxing day, letting 17 operators run no service whatever with vastly reduced services everywhere else. The next day, work overran at more than 200 engineering sites, resulting in thousands of passengers facing appalling disruption It was right that Network Rail accepted its responsibilities, and so too should the contractors, but is it not also time for the Secretary of State finally to face up to his share of the responsibility? The Office of Rail Regulation published a damning report back in November on Network Rail’s performance. Was this report not a massive warning sign for Ministers that there would be serious delivery challenges associated with the planned maintenance work over Christmas? What assurances were sought by Ministers on whether the plans for the Boxing day shutdown were robust enough, whether adequate contingencies were in place and whether there was sufficient resilience in the system to ensure that continued disruption would not run into the weekend Where were Ministers during the rail chaos? They were AWOL. It was only after days of disarray that the Secretary of State finally put down his selection box and leapt to action, releasing a statement on the Saturday evening in a desperate attempt to shift the blame entirely on to others. On Sunday morning, the rail Minister, the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Devizes (Claire Perry), sent a message to the thousands of passengers who had had their Boxing day and weekend ruined. What words of sympathy and consolation did she offer? She said she was "so chuffed" with the state of the railways—Calamity Claire, the gift that keeps on giving These problems happened on this Government’s watch. The warning signs were there. The Secretary of State has spoken about the lessons that must be learned, but must they not be learned by Ministers too and an apology be made to the travelling public?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Louise Joyce Ellman (Labour, Centre-left): Over Christmas too many passengers suffered twice—first from major disruption, when any contingency plan simply failed; and, secondly, from lack of information about what was going on. Does the Secretary of State believe that this was about individual events or was it indicative of a major problem with major works on the railways for which ministerial involvement was required?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Kelvin Peter Hopkins (Labour, Centre-left): Following another rail crisis some six years ago, it was decided to take many engineering staff in house. Now similar problems have arisen, so it can only be that Network Rail’s management is at fault. Is it not time to seek a root-and-branch investigation of Network Rail’s management systems, and to look again at the much better methods of operation employed by British Rail before the disaster of privatisation?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): As the Member who represents Finsbury Park, may I ask the Secretary of State to say a big thank you to all the staff who coped with an utterly impossible position on Saturday 27 December, when the station was so overcrowded with passengers? They deserve our recognition and thanks for the hard work that they do The Secretary of State will recall that we had a meeting in his office last year about the future of Finsbury Park station, where a piecemeal improvement has been taking place over many years. Does he not agree that there should now be a serious examination of the capacity problem at that station, given the increasing number of rail passengers, the dangerously overcrowded underground platforms, and a management mix between Transport for London and a train operator on the main line? Will he meet me again so that we can have a new discussion about Finsbury Park and the need for it to be improved?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Alison Jane Seabeck (Labour, Centre-left): The south-west was cut off from the UK last winter and Network Rail performed miracles in getting that line back up and running. I therefore find it extraordinary that reasons such as the weather have been used to excuse the chaos and incompetence of this debacle, particularly out of King’s Cross. Why did the Secretary of State feel that it was not necessary for Ministers to ask for a basic reassurance that an overrun on any of the big programmes could be managed? Why were contingency plans not in place, and why was the rail regulator warning not adhered to?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State should have had a warning about these problems from Network Rail’s performance in the run-up to Christmas. If he had been travelling on Southeastern Trains, he would have suffered a great deal of disruption on several days during that period. If he had been on top of his game, he would have asked Network Rail about its capacity to manage the engineering schemes, but he failed to do so. What sanctions will he put in place so that the management of Network Rail can be held to account for their failures over the Christmas period?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Tom Blenkinsop (Labour, Centre-left): At what point was the Secretary of State aware of the contingency plan that Network Rail had put in place to funnel passengers to a clearly inadequate solution through Finsbury Park? Why were solutions such as using the Hertford loop or allowing commuters from north Yorkshire, Teesside and the north-east to use their tickets to go through St Pancras to Sheffield and Leeds, so that they could connect with Transpennine and other services, not examined?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Diane Julie Abbott (Labour, Centre-left): Is the Secretary of State aware that, specifically in relation to what happened at King’s Cross, the travelling public will not be impressed with his bland assertion that "some aspects" of the work were delayed? Does he know which aspects were delayed? Is he able to share that with the House? Does he accept that the travelling public, including those poor people caught up at Finsbury Park, feel that so long as Network Rail can get away with just saying, "Aspects of the work were delayed", these delays will continue to happen?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Ian Colin Lucas (Labour, Centre-left): We have heard much rhetoric from the Secretary of State about additional investment in the railways. In December, did not his Department, under his direction, cancel the investment in phases 1 and 2 of modular signalling improvements in north Wales? Will he confirm that he has authorised that?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Barry Strachan Gardiner (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State quite properly said that the network failure was unacceptable, and he quite properly said that Network Rail would be held to account. But he did not say how it would be held to account. Will he please advise the House what he is doing to hold it to account, and what penalties it will pay?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): What lessons has the Secretary of State learned from this sorry episode over the Christmas period? Does he recognise that the frustration comes not just from cancellations and long delays but from the complexity of the compensation system, with different train companies applying different terms and conditions? There are also times when people end up on a rail replacement bus having paid top fares for a rail journey.
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State seems to want to blame the shadow Secretary of State and other Members of the House for not warning him that this was about to happen. When he said sorry in his original reply, was he taking responsibility personally as Secretary of State for Transport for the chaos that occurred or was he simply apologising on somebody else’s behalf?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): After the Christmas shambles, I was pleased to see that the chief executive of Network Rail voluntarily said that he would not take his bonus of £34,000. Has the Secretary of State considered introducing performance-related pay for rail bosses, in the same way as his Government advocate it for teachers?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Nicholas Dakin (Labour, Centre-left): My constituents have been contacting me, concerned about the squeeze on their living standards from a 20% increase in rail fares since 2010. How can the Secretary of State make sure that there is no repeat of the chaos and that rail passengers get the service that they are more than paying for?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
James Fitzpatrick (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State is a man of integrity. He has apologised and he has accepted that both the contingency arrangements and communications were not adequate. Has he had a chance to assess whether the vast amount of work that Network Rail undertook to do at King’s Cross was in fact too much within the time available?
Rail Network (Disruption) — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: Transportation
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): First Great Western has assured me that it tried its utmost to keep passengers informed about what was going on at Paddington on 27 December, but one of the problems was that Network Rail seemed unable to give it any clear estimates of when the work would be completed, and there were lots of false assurances. How can the Secretary of State ensure that this will not happen again? It has been pointed out to me that it happened last year, in similar circumstances, and the year before as well. Can we be sure that it will not happen next year too?
UK Ebola Preparedness — House of Commons, 2015-01-05
Topic: International Affairs
Keith Anthony Vaz (Labour, Centre-left): The Government were absolutely right to start screening on 14 October. May I urge the Secretary of State to resist calls from those who say that screening is not effective and should stop? This was not a direct flight: it went through Casablanca. Although we have put a lot of resources into Sierra Leone and we have resources at Heathrow, there appears to be no international effort in the major hubs in Africa. What steps are going to be taken to help Governments such as that in Morocco, specifically in Casablanca, which receives so many flights from other countries in Africa that end up at Heathrow airport?