argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): This is a serious debate, and I do not think the hon. Gentleman’s intervention has done anything to raise the standard of debate It is quite clear to me that our first duty is to block a disastrous no deal, and I hope amendments to that effect will be carried by the House this evening. Labour’s amendment (a), which stands in my name and in the name of my colleagues, starts by calling for sufficient time for Parliament to vote on options that prevent leaving with no deal, but whatever happens in the votes that follow, it has now become inevitable that the Government will have to extend article 50 in any scenario. If amendments intended to rule out no deal are defeated, and if this Government are serious about keeping the threat of no deal on the table, they are not even close—not even close—to being prepared, and the exit date would have to be extended Even if the Prime Minister’s deal were somehow to achieve a majority in this House next month, there is no chance that the necessary primary legislation and an extensive catalogue of secondary legislation—I believe there are over 600 statutory instruments—could clear this place between now and 29 March.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Foreign Trade
Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour, Centre-left): I can see that I am very well liked here. Does my right hon. Friend agree that clear, close and collaborative describes the relationship proposed by his amendment? That is why we need a customs union. The unions, Labour members and others are telling us that we need a customs union with our neighbours.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): Obviously a customs union would be negotiated, would be inclusive and would be designed to ensure that our jobs and investment are protected, that there is frictionless and seamless trade with the European Union and that we have a say in future trade arrangements—something the Prime Minister has absolutely failed to achieve. The fault for not achieving it lies absolutely with the Prime Minister. She claimed she would have a deal agreed by October, then she delayed the vote by a month, and she still suffered the worst—
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker. As I was saying, the fault lies exclusively with the Prime Minister, who missed her own deadline to have a deal agreed by October, and she still suffered the worst defeat of any Government in British history.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
James McMahon (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. [Interruption.] I am not sure how people in this House believe this will be received by the public watching on TV, but I have to say that the public are sick of the childish antics of people in this House and they want us to come together to find a way through this mess. There are thousands of different views on, and variations of, what people felt and thought they voted for in that referendum, but the one thing we can be certain of is that the referendum leaflet that went to every household in this country did not make any mention of leaving the customs union. Why can we not find agreement on that?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I did take an intervention from the Prime Minister, Mr Speaker. Perhaps the hon. Lady had not noticed that Is the Prime Minister seriously telling the House to wait until 13 February and put its faith in her doing negotiations in a couple of weeks that she has failed to do in the past two years? One really wonders how many more ceremonial baubles and promises of ermine will be handed out in vain in an attempt to cajole Conservative MPs to vote for a deal that has been overwhelmingly rejected by this House. The Prime Minister says that a second referendum would be like asking the public to vote again until they give the right answer, but so far that is precisely what she is asking this House to do Labour will today back amendments that attempt to rule out this Government’s reckless option of allowing the UK to crash out without a deal. Everyone bar the Prime Minister accepts this would be disastrous. The CBI says: "The projected impact"— of no deal "on the UK economy would be devastating" Just yesterday, the Federation of Small Businesses called on Members of this House to block no deal. The TUC, representing millions of workers, is also opposed to no deal, as its general secretary, Frances O’Grady, reiterated to me last week. Every Opposition party in this House is opposed to no deal. Many Conservative Members, even Front-Bench and Cabinet Conservative Members, are opposed to no deal. Let me quote the Chancellor, who said recently: "I clearly do not believe that making a choice to leave without a deal would be a responsible thing to do" So, presumably, he too wants no deal ruled out.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I am making progress. The Home Secretary has gone further and called for a free vote on the amendment tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper). The Labour party will back that amendment tonight, because to crash out without a deal would be deeply damaging for industry and the economy—that is why the Chancellor says it would be irresponsible. I say to my right hon. Friend now that in backing her amendment, we are backing a short window of three months to allow time for renegotiation.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I want to address the point that my right hon. Friend has raised about my amendment and I do not want to cut across a very difficult wider issue. On his point about the amendment, I reassure my right hon. Friend that the purpose of the amendment and the Bill is not to fix any particular time for any extension, or even to decide now what an extension of article 50 should be; it is simply to give the House the ability to do so at the end of February. I agree that nobody wants to see any unnecessary delays.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my right hon. Friend for those remarks and the spirit in which she made them. Her amendment quite clearly has the effect of ruling out no deal on 29 March. Surely that should be good and important for this House. It will not be any comfort, after 29 March, to say, "I told you so," when the lorries are backing up on the M20, cancer patients cannot get medicines and prices are rising in our shops. Tonight, we have the opportunity to take no deal off the table When the Prime Minister invited party leaders for talks, I said to her that she must first remove the threat of no deal. If the House today votes to remove the immediate threat of crashing out without a deal on 29 March, as I fervently hope it does and will, I will be happy to meet the Prime Minister to discuss a sensible solution that works for the whole country—which is what the Labour party wants to achieve Many of the amendments tabled, including those in the names of my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds West (Rachel Reeves), and of my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Jack Dromey) and the right hon. Member for Meriden (Dame Caroline Spelman), advocate delaying article 50 to give Parliament more time to break the impasse and avoid the dangers of no deal. If the House votes for any of those amendments, the Prime Minister must accept that an extension to article 50 is a responsible measure to allow time for real renegotiation and to find a deal that can win the support of this House. It will mean that no deal is off the table and that the red lines must change.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I am making progress, if I may. The primary part of Labour’s amendment is about finding a workable solution. That means a new customs union, a strong single market deal and no race to the bottom on workers’ rights, on environmental protections and standards or on consumer standards. The EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier has been clear that "unanimously the European Council…have always said that if the UK chooses to shift its red lines in future…and go beyond a simple free trade agreement…then the European Union will be immediately ready to…give a favourable response." We understand that just this weekend the EU Commission President told the Prime Minister that accepting the case for a permanent customs union would help to solve the issue of the backstop arrangement. Indeed, Ireland’s Europe Minister made exactly that point at the weekend, saying: "The backstop is there because of the red lines that the UK put down" at the beginning of this process We understand that today the Government will back the amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Sir Graham Brady)—the Prime Minister said as much—which will require changes to the backstop, but still we have no clarity on what changes they are or which red lines will change to allow that to happen. On the other side, we see that there is flexibility—an apparent willingness now to renegotiate—but only if the red lines change.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. We are witnessing the long, slow decline of this Government as they run down the clock. They put off the vote then lost the vote. They came to the House today and are now offering more votes next week, then a week later and a week later. They are running down the clock, using the fear of no deal as opposed to the Prime Minister’s deal. Her deal was defeated two weeks ago, but the Prime Minister is still to answer the question on which of her red lines she is prepared to change, or even just be flexible on. It is clear that the obstacle to a solution is the Prime Minister. She is refusing to accept the clearly stated will of this House, which has decisively—in record numbers for a parliamentary vote—defeated her deal and which is equally clear in its opposition to a disastrous no deal, which I hope and expect will be reiterated tonight.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): So far, the Prime Minister has only doubled down on her own defeated deal, saying at last week’s Prime Minister’s Question Time that her deal delivers "the benefits of a customs union and the benefits of our own trade policy."—[Official Report, 23 January 2019; Vol. 653, c. 237.] It does no such thing. The political declaration fails to deliver on the Chequers promise of frictionless trade—it does not even guarantee tariff-free trade. It means that we lose the 40 to 50 trade agreements we have through the EU.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Foreign Trade
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): The point that I was making is that we could lose 40 to 50 trade agreements that we have through the European Union, which the International Trade Secretary has so far failed to replicate at all, despite the extraordinary and very bold claims that he made at the beginning of this whole Brexit process This is a Government in denial, split from top to bottom, and incapable of uniting themselves, let alone the country.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): No, I am making progress; I will not give way any more The Government are in denial about the majority view of this House, which I believe exists to rule out no deal and to get a workable deal that includes a customs union. That is why, tonight, Labour will back amendments that give this House the opportunity to recognise the reality that this Government have so far failed to recognise. This Government’s shambolic handling of Brexit negotiations is fast becoming a crisis. It is worrying to businesses and it is worrying to people in work who are concerned about their futures. Everyone who is worried is worried because they have no leadership on this process from their Government. They have no leadership from a Government who have demonstrated that they have no ability to negotiate a good deal, no willingness to listen to Parliament—hence we are back here again despite the biggest ever defeat in parliamentary history—and, crucially, no acceptance that they must change course. The Government have spent most of the past two years arguing among themselves rather than negotiating with the European Union. And they are still arguing among themselves and failing to come up with a workable solution. Tonight, I hope that this House does its job and leads where this Government have failed.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I rise to speak to amendment (b) and to support amendments (a), (g), (i) and (j). I also support amendment (h), but it has not been selected There are two months to go until the end of the article 50 time limit. The Prime Minister’s deal was rejected comprehensively, fundamentally because I think all sides shared the view that it would weaken us abroad and in the negotiations ahead. It represents a blindfold Brexit that would weaken our negotiating hand. The Prime Minister is not instilling confidence that she has a plan to sort this out. I am really worried that the delay, the drift and the chasing of unicorns mean that we could end up with no deal by accident, even though that would hit jobs, our NHS and our border security, and put up food prices for the poorest families in the country I have called many times on the Government to support a customs union. Like many across this House, I want the Government to get a good Brexit deal that can pull people together and command support across the country, but I see no sign of that happening right now, and the clock is ticking. I am very worried by the warnings I have had from Haribo, Burberry, West Yorkshire police, GMB, manufacturers, trade unions and small businesses in my constituency about the consequences of us going over the edge of a cliff.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Technology
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): Does my right hon. Friend share my dismay at how Government Members have reacted to industry’s concerns? Even Airbus, our largest aerospace company, has been subject to vitriol and hostility. Surely such responses defy all logic.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): That is certainly not my intention with the Bill. It is about giving the House the opportunity to extend article 50 if we need more time, and to be able to decide the length of the extension. The whole point is that the motion put to the House would be amendable and those amendments would be binding.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): Does my right hon. Friend agree with me, and would she confirm to the House again, that this is not about extending article 50, but about allowing Parliament to make the decision in the event that there is no deal and that the next step facing us is crashing out with no deal?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We would be taking no decisions today, and we would be taking no decisions next Tuesday, when we would discuss the Bill. Instead, we would simply be saying that, at the end of February, with just one month to go before we get to the end of the article 50 process, it would be for Parliament to decide whether to seek an extension, and how long that should be for.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): I think we all realise that today’s debate is predominantly about process, but that cannot hide one essential truth: we are facing a crisis; our country is in a state of suspended animation because of that crisis; and the intemperate nature of the debate—partly here today and certainly outside the Chamber—is a consequence of that crisis, because in truth every single one of us present is anxious about what is going to happen to our country Following the defeat of the Prime Minister’s withdrawal agreement and political declaration, she said that she would reach out, and I welcomed that, although it would have been much better had it been done two years ago. We now know that she is not for turning on the political declaration but seeks somehow to change the backstop. I am all for optimism, but I somehow doubt that the EU is for turning on this issue either. Unless the Prime Minister knows something that we do not, I do not see how it is going to be changed.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): Is my right hon. Friend aware of the fact that Guy Verhofstadt has today said: "The deal we have is fair and cannot be re-negotiated. The backstop is needed because of UK red lines and was crafted by the UK and the EU to secure the Good Friday Agreement…We remain open to positive changes regarding the future relationship and it is time for a more consensual cross-party approach to deliver this" Does that not make it absolutely clear that the Prime Minister’s approach is a charade, and it needs to be stopped now?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): In supporting amendment (n), the Prime Minister has driven a coach and horses through the deal that she asked us to endorse a fortnight ago. If my right hon. Friend is right that she cannot secure legal change in the withdrawal agreement, what can she come back with on 13 February?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): Well, in truth, it is very hard to see what she can come back with if my right hon. Friend is correct in his assessment. It is odd, to put it very gently, that we are spending so much time on the backstop, which is something that the Government signed up to more than a year ago, when we really should be debating the most important issue: the future of our relationship with our European neighbours. The reason why the defeat was so large, certainly in relation to those on the Opposition Benches, is that we are not prepared to sign up to a deal that, far from giving the nation certainty about the future of that relationship, has shrouded it in fog and mist that is entirely of the Government’s own making. My preferred approach, as Members will probably know, is to be part of the European economic area and a customs union. Other Members have different views, which is why I put down the amendment calling for indicative votes as recommended by the Select Committee. Although the Prime Minister today appeared to be unenthusiastic about indicative votes, she spent most of her speech hoovering up indicative suggestions, mainly from those on her own Benches. I gently say to her that, one day, she may find herself climbing into the "little rubber life-raft"—to quote a former Prime Minister—of indicative votes. Until that central issue is addressed and until the Government are honest with the House about the choices that we have to make, we will continue to remain in our current state—businesses will continue to remain uncertain about their future and, frankly, the public will continue to ask us, "What on earth is going on?" That brings me to the amendments that seek to prevent us from leaving the EU without an agreement in just 59 days’ time.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): I say to the right hon. Gentleman, as I have said to the House before, in the end, if we are to make progress, people will have to compromise. It is a very British tradition, which seems to be somewhat lacking in the process at the moment The Select Committee took a lot of evidence and we came to a very, very stark conclusion, and I will quote what we said: "A ‘managed no deal’ cannot constitute the policy of any responsible Government." I do not think that that conclusion will come as a surprise to the Prime Minister. She knows it, most of the Cabinet know it, business knows it and the House knows that the damage that would be inflicted, and the sheer practical difficulties of leaving on 29 March, mean that this is an outcome that cannot possibly be contemplated. I know there are those on the Government Benches who say, "Oh, it’s all exaggerated." What I do not understand is why it is that they, with great respect, appear to know more about the consequences of no deal than do the businesses that import things, that make things and that export things.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: Foreign Trade
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): No, I will not give way Those businesses do not want tariffs, bureaucracy, delays and checks. The truth is that no one has any idea about what customs officers in Calais will do on the first day and the second day if there is a no-deal Brexit, but, eventually, those officers will have to start checking goods, because we will be a third country. Every lorry that is stopped—
European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 — House of Commons, 2019-01-29
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): No The lorries will be backed up from Dover, and a lorry stuck on the M20 cannot be in Germany to pick up the car parts that car plants in Britain require in order to function When we add in what my right hon. Friend the Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper) said about security in her powerful speech, as well as the uncertainty for citizens here and abroad—maybe some British citizens will feel that they must return to the United Kingdom because of that uncertainty—then we realise why this is a prospect that cannot be contemplated. I would not want to be the Government who had to explain to the British people why these things were happening, when the Government were responsible in the first place Although many of us may still cling to the hope that the Prime Minister will not take us out of the EU with no deal, I am not absolutely sure. That is why I will vote enthusiastically for amendment (b) in the name of my right hon. Friend the Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford and amendment (g) in the name of the right hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve).