argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Customs and Borders — House of Commons, 2018-04-26
Topic: International Affairs
Kevin Paul Hollinrake (Conservative, Centre-right): I voted remain and campaigned heavily to remain. I held eight debates during that campaign, alongside a gentleman from the UK Independence party, to help voters to decide what was the right or wrong thing to do. I said repeatedly that if we left, the negotiations would be difficult, and for two reasons First, given that we had been members of the European Union for 44 years, the complexity of the relationship was almost inconceivable. Today, hon. Members on both sides of the House have spoken about the complexity of supply chains, and that is obviously why people support remaining in a customs union. My second reason for saying that the negotiations would be difficult was that the UK and the EU had different priorities and imperatives For starters, our exports to the EU account for 12% of our economy—to anyone listening to today’s debate, it would almost sound as though we were talking about the whole economy—but that represents only 3% or 4% of the EU economy, so there is clearly a disparity there. Then there is the fact that the EU’s principal priority would be to ensure that the EU did not fall apart as a result of other people walking out that door. For that reason, it is very difficult for the EU to give us a good deal, despite the fact that the Prime Minister has been very reasonable on exit terms and on proposals for a future relationship regarding things such as the highly streamlined customs border, which seems the preferable option of the two on the table. Such a border arrangement works in north America, and in Norway and Sweden, so it makes sense Nevertheless, the negotiations will be difficult. That is why people on both sides of the House are concerned, and it is why people are talking about a customs union. I think that that is the wrong thing. Yes, being in a customs union would remove the need for checks on tariffs, but unless we were also going to stay in the single market, we would still need checks to ensure regulatory alignment, so the queues at Dover would continue In addition, if we were in the single market and customs union, we might as well be in the European Union. In fact, that would be much worse than being in the European Union, because we would have no say whatever over the rules—no say in the trade agreements and no say in the new rules. The worst of all options would be to be in those two without being a member of the European Union Another option would be to stay in the single market only. That is my preference; if I had to choose the single market or a customs union, I would stay in the single market, through the European Free Trade Association and the European economic area. That has benefits. For example, there would be no need for checks on product standards. Other than that, however, I support the Prime Minister in her negotiations and wish her well.
Customs and Borders — House of Commons, 2018-04-26
Topic: Foreign Trade
Marcus John Hudson Fysh (Conservative, Centre-right): In her Mansion House speech, the Prime Minister set out five tests for the EU negotiations and the agreement that we will reach through them. The first test was the need to respect the referendum result and the desire of the people expressed through that referendum to take back control. The customs union plan entirely gives up control to the EU, and the free circulation of goods would also need regulatory harmonisation in the single market, as we just heard. The second test was that the agreement must endure. The customs union plan, which would go against the outcome of the referendum and the election, would divide the country and not settle the issue The third test was that the arrangement should protect jobs and security through our continuing to work together with the EU. The customs union plan would give our commercial policy, our trade defences, our tariff levels and our relationships with third countries to the EU, and I do not see how that is consistent with that test. The fourth test was that we would be a confident, modern, outward-looking country that is proud to stand up for its values, but the customs union plan would mean that we would be unable to make our way independently in the world, and to spread our belief in free trade and the opportunities that come from it. The fifth and final test was that the arrangements should strengthen our Union and our union of people, but the customs union plan would take their sovereignty and powers and give them to the EU. It would weaken them, and weaken and discredit their representative institutions If the proponents of the customs union succeeded in getting it adopted, and if the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership were revived as a trade agreement between the US and the EU, the EU could commit the UK to that without Britons having any practical say at all. The Cabinet resolved recently—the Prime Minister expressed its settled view—that it wants the freedom to negotiate trade deals with other countries and to take back control of our laws. The customs union plan goes directly against that In the final seconds of my contribution, I want to say that the customs partnership idea, which is one of the options, has serious problems. Full traceability is a long way off and would impose costs on every transaction throughout the economy. The full circulation of goods would require full regulatory harmonisation, and full ECJ oversight and submission to it. The need to make rules of origin declarations would not go away because importers would still have to cope with that—they would just be EU rules of origin.
Customs and Borders — House of Commons, 2018-04-26
Topic: International Affairs
Melvyn John Stride (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate the right hon. Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper) on securing today’s extremely important debate. I thank all Members for their passionate, heartfelt and informed contributions. I do not intend to go through all the contributions, given their volume and the fact I would like to make sure I leave time for any Member who wishes to intervene on me to ask any questions or to make any points. If I have time, I will leave a minute for the right hon. Lady at the end A number of important points have been made in this debate. First and foremost is the matter of Northern Ireland and its Irish border. Some Members have suggested that, in fact, we are prepared to jettison the Good Friday agreement, to undermine it in some way or not to stand up for it, which is certainly not the case. We remain entirely committed to the Good Friday agreement, as we do to having no hard border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland and, indeed, no effective customs border down the Irish sea.
Customs and Borders — House of Commons, 2018-04-26
Topic: Foreign Trade
Melvyn John Stride (Conservative, Centre-right): The position of the Prime Minister and the Government is that we are confident of a deal. In that context, this issue of no deal is not particularly pertinent Other important points have been raised. I think everybody recognises the importance of having as frictionless a border as possible. Of course, it is recognised that we would achieve that if we stayed within the customs union or a customs union, which is de facto the same thing, but that is not the same as suggesting that there are not alternative arrangements—I will discuss those alternative arrangements in a moment—that would achieve as good as the same thing as a frictionless border Many Members today have raised the importance of being free as a nation to go out and negotiate our own free trade arrangements, which of course means that we need to leave the customs union.
Customs and Borders — House of Commons, 2018-04-26
Topic: Foreign Trade
Melvyn John Stride (Conservative, Centre-right): As the hon. Lady knows, we are currently working on transferring the EU’s agreements with third-world countries. Of course, in future we will be free to strike our own FTAs with other countries, which we are currently prohibited from doing It is good to hear the hon. Member for Bootle (Peter Dowd) agree with Margaret Thatcher at long last. She stood for free markets, free trade and fiscal responsibility, and I look forward to hearing more of that from him in the years to come I have just been informed that I must leave two minutes for the right hon. Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford, which I will endeavour to do—[Interruption]— although she is generously saying that one minute will be enough The hon. Member for Bootle suggested that the Government’s position is confused, although I am not sure whether he was thinking of his own position when he said that. The reality is that the Labour party has a classic fudge on the customs union. It wants to tell everybody that we can somehow be in the customs union while not being a rule taker—that we can somehow negotiate to be in the room when FTAs between the EU and other countries are negotiated. The Labour party accuses us of seeking to cherry-pick, but by its own logic, it is quite clear that this is just not a realistic possibility The hon. Gentleman specifically mentioned clause 31 of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill, which will indeed permit the UK to enter into a customs union with another customs union or territory. That is something we will almost certainly wish to do with our Crown dependencies. The clause will therefore not be relevant to the European Union after our departure. The Government are therefore clear that when we leave the European Union we will leave its customs union. That is a matter of fact. The Government have also been clear that forming a new customs union with the EU is not compatible with a meaningful independent trade policy, so we will not be doing that. Outside the EU and a customs union, the UK will be able to sign its own trade deals with our partners around the world.
Pension Protection Fund: Former Carillion Employees — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Labor
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): There are 12 Carillion defined benefit schemes in a PPF assessment period. The PPF is working with scheme administrators to determine whether they can pay pensions at or above PPF benefits. Where a scheme cannot do this, the PPF will assume responsibility and pay compensation.
Pension Protection Fund: Former Carillion Employees — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Labor
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): As I said, the Carillion schemes are at present in the assessment period for the funds, and we are looking at what happened in those instances. The hon. Lady will be pleased to know that we have brought forward our White Paper on defined benefits and increasing the regulator’s powers to support these schemes in the best way possible, to make sure pensioners get those pensions that they so rightly deserve. It is the Conservative party that will be strengthening that for workers, to make sure we look after such pensioners.
Pension Protection Fund: Former Carillion Employees — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Labor
James Whiteside Gray (Conservative, Centre-right): Will the Secretary of State pay particular attention to that group of public sector workers who transferred into Carillion and are now retired, and who were covered not so much by the PPF, because they were given ex gratia payments rather than pensions, at the time they transferred?
Pension Protection Fund: Former Carillion Employees — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Government Operations
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend raises an important question, and he is right: a number of Carillion employees were compulsorily transferred from the public sector, and we are looking at whether they can now rejoin the public sector service scheme. We are working hard to determine that.
Pension Protection Fund: Former Carillion Employees — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Labor
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): The regulator is independent, and that is what it does: look at pension schemes. We have, through the White Paper, strengthened the regulator’s powers and now for the first time brought forward criminal sanctions should any director or employer bring into harm wilfully and neglectfully the workers’ pension scheme.
Universal Credit Roll-out — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): Universal credit is a modern flexible benefit which provides tailored support to claimants. Three separate research studies show that UC is having a positive impact on employer outcomes. The changes announced in the Budget are giving even more support for claimants.
Universal Credit Roll-out — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Labor
Questions: I recently visited jobcentre staff in Bedworth to see how universal credit was helping my constituents. I was delighted to hear of encouraging examples of success, including one claimant who had been helped into work within weeks. Under the previous system, she would have waited months to get the same help. Does this not show that universal credit is acting faster to transform lives?
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is correct, and I want to thank him for going to meet people at his Jobcentre Plus and for speaking to the dedicated work coaches who are working tirelessly to help people to get into work. These are the tales that I am hearing. Universal credit is an in-work and out-of-work benefit. We are about getting people into a job and then helping them with progression, so that they can get into a job and have a career and also have job progression. That is why we have over 3 million more people in work.
Universal Credit Roll-out — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: I recently visited jobcentre staff in Bedworth to see how universal credit was helping my constituents. I was delighted to hear of encouraging examples of success, including one claimant who had been helped into work within weeks. Under the previous system, she would have waited months to get the same help. Does this not show that universal credit is acting faster to transform lives?; Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me take this opportunity to tell the Secretary of State that in three of the eight wards in my constituency, child poverty is at over 50%. Universal credit has only just started to be rolled out, and it will only make things worse. Her Government are also going to take away free school meals—[Interruption.] In the future, there will not be the access to free school meals that there is now. What is the level of child poverty that she is willing to support?
Esther Louise McVey (Conservative, Centre-right): We have had this debate before, and this has been corrected many times. Actually, 50,000 more children are going to have free school meals. These scaremongering stories are not true at all. Let us look at what is happening. We now have 1 million fewer people in absolute poverty—a record low. We now have 300,000 fewer children in absolute poverty—a new record low. There are also 500,000 fewer working-age adults in absolute poverty—a record low. This Government are about helping people to get into work, which is the first step they can take towards taking control of their life. From there, they can have career progression.
Personal Independence Payments: Disability Assessment — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: If she will take steps to ensure that personal independence payments claimants who have been diagnosed with degenerative medical conditions do not have to undertake a disability assessment.
Sarah Louise Newton (Conservative, Centre-right): Assessments are important, so that people who need support receive the right level. Where there is enough existing evidence to determine benefit entitlement, claimants do not need a face-to-face assessment. We are committed to continuously improving PIP, so that those with degenerative diseases get the support they need in a timely fashion.
Personal Independence Payments: Disability Assessment — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: If she will take steps to ensure that personal independence payments claimants who have been diagnosed with degenerative medical conditions do not have to undertake a disability assessment.
Sarah Louise Newton (Conservative, Centre-right): PIP is working, and it is working well for all people with disabilities, including those with degenerative conditions. The reality is that 89% of claimants with motor neurone disease are on the enhanced rate of daily living and 90% are on the enhanced rate of mobility. That compares with 52% on the higher rate of care and 89% on higher rate mobility under the disability living allowance, the predecessor benefit.
Personal Independence Payments: Disability Assessment — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: If she will take steps to ensure that personal independence payments claimants who have been diagnosed with degenerative medical conditions do not have to undertake a disability assessment.
Andrea Marie Jenkyns (Conservative, Centre-right): Last week, I hosted a pensioner and senior citizens’ fair in Morley and Wrenthorpe. At the event, a gentleman with Parkinson’s disease told me that he had to reapply for PIP every two to three years, which caused him great distress. What are the Government doing to ensure that claimants with degenerative conditions such as that do not have to go through any unnecessary stress?
Personal Independence Payments: Disability Assessment — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: If she will take steps to ensure that personal independence payments claimants who have been diagnosed with degenerative medical conditions do not have to undertake a disability assessment.
Sarah Louise Newton (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend makes a good point about how closely we work with disabled people and stakeholders. He makes particular reference to the severe conditions work that we have implemented for ESA claimants, where we have worked with stakeholders to design a new process, so that the most poorly and vulnerable people have a personal, tailor-made process.
Child Poverty: Family Indicators — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): Good morning, Mr Speaker. [Interruption.] The Government are committed to action that improves children’s long-term outcomes by tackling the root causes of poverty and disadvantage. In April 2017, we published nine indicators that track progress in tackling the disadvantages that can affect families and children, and we aim to update them annually. The next publication is due shortly.
Child Poverty: Family Indicators — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate my hon. Friend on his constant and vigorous campaigning on the issue, and particularly on the importance he attaches to fatherhood and family stability. The Government agree with him about that, and a number of programmes are designed to move the dial on the nine indicators that we have published. For example, alongside the fight against worklessness and the troubled families programme, we are specifically investing £39 million in a programme to reduce parental conflict and increase family stability.
Child Poverty: Family Indicators — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Education
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): As the hon. Gentleman will know, all hon. Members should be engaged in the battle against poverty. We in particular have chosen to take a different approach. Pleasingly, the Children’s Commissioner has identified that low educational attainment is critical to the future employment and economic prospects of all children. That is why we are focused on it as one of the two planks of Government policy on the matter, why we have concentrated so hard and why we are so pleased that so many more children are going to good and excellent schools.
Child Poverty: Family Indicators — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: The latest figures for the east midlands show that just over 106,000 of children in poverty are in workless households. That is down 23,000 since 2010. Although there is much more to do, does my hon. Friend agree that jobs created under this Government are transforming the lives of the most vulnerable in our society?
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and is a renowned champion of those in poverty in his constituency. It is interesting to note that nearly three quarters of children in poverty move out of poverty when their parents move into full-time work. We must capture and use that in our constant fight against poverty.
Child Poverty: Family Indicators — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: The latest figures for the east midlands show that just over 106,000 of children in poverty are in workless households. That is down 23,000 since 2010. Although there is much more to do, does my hon. Friend agree that jobs created under this Government are transforming the lives of the most vulnerable in our society?; Two thirds of children in poverty live in a household where at least one parent works. New analysis shows that child poverty will increase dramatically by 2030, with the main reason cited as UK Government cuts. Will the Secretary of State come to my constituency to see for herself the devastating effects of her Government’s cuts, which already have an impact on too many children in North Ayrshire and Arran?
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): I have seen reports of the new analysis this morning and, obviously, we are more than willing to have a look. However, such reports—there have been several in the past few weeks—tend to accept in the small print that forecasting poverty in the future is a very inexact science and often leads to odd results, not least because they often do not take behavioural change into account. The whole thrust of the Government’s welfare reforms has been not just to ensure that we get assistance and money to people efficaciously, but to effect behavioural change because we know that accessing work is by far and away our most potent tool in the fight against poverty.
Child Poverty: Family Indicators — House of Commons, 2018-03-26
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: The latest figures for the east midlands show that just over 106,000 of children in poverty are in workless households. That is down 23,000 since 2010. Although there is much more to do, does my hon. Friend agree that jobs created under this Government are transforming the lives of the most vulnerable in our society?; Two thirds of children in poverty live in a household where at least one parent works. New analysis shows that child poverty will increase dramatically by 2030, with the main reason cited as UK Government cuts. Will the Secretary of State come to my constituency to see for herself the devastating effects of her Government’s cuts, which already have an impact on too many children in North Ayrshire and Arran?
Alan Mak (Conservative, Centre-right): School breakfast clubs play a key role in tackling child poverty, including helping parents get to work. Will my hon. Friend join me in welcoming the announcement last week of £26 million investment in school breakfast clubs and commit the Department to supporting them across the country?