argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: Foreign Trade
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If the backstop is enacted, tariffs will be applied to Scottish fishing exports, but Northern Ireland will be protected by tariff-free access to both the EU and the UK. The Scottish Secretary said that he would resign if special provisions were given to Northern Ireland. Does my hon. Friend share my concern that the Scottish Secretary is not only still in the job, but urging his colleagues to back a deal that disadvantages Scotland?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Stewart Malcolm McDonald (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): What my hon. Friend may not know is that a Labour spokesperson said after Prime Minister’s Question Time that in theory Labour could change its mind and be against Brexit in any future snap election. Does he agree that a Schrödinger's Brexit is not exactly a step forward for the official Opposition?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman will probably be aware that the Prime Minister spoke to 200 MPs in one of the rooms in Portcullis House last night. Again, she ruled out a second referendum, but she said that if the deal does not get through, there are two options left: a no-deal Brexit or no Brexit at all with the revocation of article 50. Businesses up and down the country are going to have to start thinking about how they react once the deal is voted down. Will the hon. Gentleman venture his view on what he would do in that scenario?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: Agriculture
Stephen Patrick Gethins (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I will slightly differ from him in that I will answer his question, while he did not answer mine. I urge him to read the Fisheries Jurisdiction Bill, which would have taken us out of the CFP while retaining our place in the EU and which his party rejected. Now can he tell me: how does our fishing community get the fabulous produce that is produced in his constituency and mine to the markets they need to get to if we are outside the customs union?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Deidre Leanne Brock (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): At the end of the day, if push came to shove—if we came to a crunch—and there was a choice only between Scotland remaining in the UK and Scotland remaining in Europe, which would the hon. Lady choose?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Patrick John Grady (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend says that many of her constituents are moving from leave to remain. Is it not the case that many of them are also moving from no to yes on the question of Scottish independence as they watch this play out?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Carol Frances Monaghan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): That is exactly what many of the emails say—they voted no in 2014 because of their concern about European Union membership, and now their worst concerns are coming to pass I was in Romania last year as part of a parliamentary delegation. Everywhere we went, there was a celebration of Europe and its membership of the European Union. People showed great pride in the country having been a member since 2007. It was notable that one issue raised fairly regularly with the delegation was the brain drain that Romania was experiencing. It was seeing its most talented and very best young people moving to other parts of Europe. We gain benefit from that, and we should continue to Let us compare that with the UK. We joined a trade organisation very reluctantly in the early 1970s because we were being economically disadvantaged by not being a member of it. Almost immediately afterwards, there was a referendum to see whether that had been the right decision. Had we really done what we should have done? Throughout that time, we heard about European bureaucracy and about how things were being done to us. There was lots of comedy about it. I remember episodes of "Yes, Minister" in which people talked about sausages and bendy bananas. It is rather ironic that we are talking about the bureaucracy of the European Union and European Parliament when, just along the corridor, we have a whole pile of unelected bureaucrats sitting in this building The nature of the arguments in the referendum campaign also caused me deep concern. There were stories about millions going to the EU that could be spent on the NHS instead. There was scaremongering about swarms of migrants. A lot of this was stoked up by the right-wing media, and it was received by a public who were looking for leadership. EU nationals were blamed for the strain on schools, the health service and social housing, but let us be clear that the majority of EU nationals in the UK are of working age and are contributing. Three to 18 is the age of education, but the majority of EU nationals here are not in that age group. The biggest strain on our health service comes from those who are over 70, and that does not generally include EU nationals When I first came to London to sit in this place, I had a flat in a building where more than half the flats were empty, because they had been bought up and banked by foreign money launderers who used them as a place to keep their investments. Those flats were empty when homeless people were sleeping out on the streets. That was not the fault of EU nationals. If we want to deal with the housing crisis, we need to build houses for social use—for people who need houses. We need to stop building houses that are going to sit empty in the centre of London.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On that theme, is my hon. Friend aware that the UK is currently the most unequal country in the EU? The people who financed Vote Leave are the very ones who are going to do their best to make the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. That will be the Brexit dividend.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: Labor
Carol Frances Monaghan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If the hon. Gentleman looks at the contributions from SNP Members over the past couple of years, he will see that when we have talked about salary thresholds, the message we have sent has been strong, clear and consistent. Salary thresholds do not work, and they specifically do not work in Scotland, where people earn less than in parts of the south-east of England. It would be good if the hon. Gentleman joined us in calling for the scrapping of these salary thresholds.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Carol Frances Monaghan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend confirms the point that I was making I want to move on to Euratom. Since the vote in 2016, I have regularly raised issues about Euratom. When I have asked about the arrangements for importing radioactive sources for medical scans and cancer treatments, I have been accused of scaremongering. Let us be clear: Euratom regulates nuclear facilities and materials. Outside Euratom it is still possible to carry out such regulation, but Euratom also guarantees a supply of medical radioisotopes. There are only a few reactors worldwide that actually produce them. They have short half-lives and have to get from production to use point very quickly, and Euratom guarantees that. What arrangements is the UK putting in place to make sure that we can get them here very quickly? If we do not have them, the 500,000 diagnostic scans and 10,000 cancer treatments that take place every year will not be able to happen. That is fundamental, and we have not had answers. Articles 79 to 85 of the draft agreement talk about Euratom, but there is nothing in it about future supplies and no answers about future arrangements I will not be voting for this deal because of the impact on our universities and our research collaborations, because we have not had any answers about the medical radioisotopes that are currently supplied by Euratom and because of the economic dangers to Scotland in being removed from the single market and the customs union but, ultimately and fundamentally, because of the removal of freedom of movement, which we on the SNP Benches hold so dear.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2019-01-09
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Patrick Gethins (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I respect the way the Minister is going about this, and his generosity. On the article 50 extension—which is critical, regardless of what he thinks—achieving what we all want to achieve by 29 March, and having a proper discussion and getting solutions in place, will be very, very difficult. Has he at least explored the possibility of an article 50 extension with the 27 member states?
UK Soft Power — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Patrick Gethins (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Minister is right to point out outside organisations. Will he, like me, pay due credit to the brave non-governmental organisations that do fantastic work and enhance our soft power in some of the most difficult conflict environments in the world, not least Yemen? Today, the United Nations is appealing for £3.2 billion to help organisations such as Saferworld and International Rescue Committee. Should that not be our focus, rather than the £4.6 billion we spent on arms?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: This Government have done great work supporting marine conservation around the world, but will my right hon. Friend outline what plans the Department has to support the marine protected area around the pristine waters of Ascension Island? This would cost as little as £120,000 a year to enforce and oversee, which represents good value.;   I welcome the work of the Foreign Office last year in hosting a major international conference on tackling the illegal wildlife trade, but what assessment has the Foreign Office made of the recent decisions made by Japan and Iceland to resume whaling? What steps will the Government take to encourage our friends to change their mind?; More than 1 million Venezuelan refugees who have been forced to flee Maduro’s humanitarian catastrophe are now in Colombia. I have a large, vibrant Colombian community in Southwark who are very worried about the knock-on impact of that crisis on their country, and on family and friends. What support and resource are the Government giving to the Colombian Government to manage this situation?; Along with the hon. Member for Keighley (John Grogan), I was in Kosovo last week representing the all-party group. Ministers will be aware of the concerns about land swap talks between Kosovo and Serbia. What assessment have the Government made of this and other potential changes to borders in the western Balkans?; Family members of the London-based human rights defender Sayed Alwadaei had their sentences upheld yesterday in Bahrain in what the UN has described as a reprisal case, one that has been condemned by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Will the Government call for their release?; Will my right hon. Friend confirm what support the UK is providing to Ukraine to ensure that its merchant and naval shipping can have free access to its ports across the sea of Azov?
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Fourteen million people in Yemen face the threat of starvation because of a blockade imposed by Saudi Arabia. How can the Government ever justify selling a billion pounds’-worth of weapons per year to a country that is deliberately using famine as a weapon of war?
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of her statement. I have to say that I find myself once again agreeing with the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke). There is the possibility that we will extend article 50 beyond the end of June. In the light of that, may I give a helpful suggestion to the Prime Minister? The Scottish National party is already putting in place candidates for the European elections. May I suggest that the Conservatives consider doing the same There are only 19 parliamentary days until Brexit day, yet the Prime Minister wants to delay the meaningful vote until 12 March—why? From 12 March, there are only 10 parliamentary days before Brexit. We will have lost nine days in which this issue could have been resolved. The Dutch Prime Minister says: "We are sleep walking into no deal scenario." There was no breakthrough in the 45-minute meeting with the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel. Council President Donald Tusk said that an extension of article 50 would be the "rational" decision. Although, that would suggest that this Government are capable of making rational decisions—there is little evidence of that Prime Minister, your strategy to run down the clock is disastrous. Is it not the case that you have continued to fail to reach an agreement on the backstop? Is it not the case that you cannot get the alternative arrangements on the backstop that you promised at the end of—
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Ian Blackford (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Mr Speaker, is it not the case that the Government cannot get the alternative arrangements on the backstop that were promised at the end of January, because the EU will not renegotiate? The EU has repeatedly made it clear that the withdrawal agreement is non-negotiable. What does the Prime Minister not get about that Prime Minister, businesses and citizens are worried about no deal—worried about the supply of medicines and food. It is the height of irresponsibility for any Government to threaten their citizens with such consequences. The Prime Minister sits and laughs at what she is doing to the people of the United Kingdom—what a disgrace! This Prime Minister indicates that she is simply not fit for office. Prime Minister, will you accept the overwhelming advice of business, MPs and your Cabinet? Rule out no deal and extend article 50, but do it today. This should not be left until the middle of March Mr Speaker, we cannot trust this Prime Minister. Parliament should take the opportunity to impose the timeline that she has set out today, so that she cannot dodge this.
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Listening to this mess it is no wonder that in Scotland the EU is more popular than the UK. The only sovereign decision this Parliament can take is to revoke article 50, to prevent leaving without a deal. An extension to article 50 means the Prime Minister has to beg the EU27 and put the UK at the mercy of the kindness of the EU27. Does she not agree that revoking article 50 is better than leaving without a deal, which is the current trajectory for the UK given the letter she wrote on 29 March 2017?
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Lisa Cameron (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): From what the Prime Minister says, I understand that from her point of view the backstop is the crux of the matter. She stated: "We discussed the legal changes that are required to guarantee that the Northern Ireland backstop cannot endure indefinitely" but then she stopped, so what progress has been made to date in relation to those legal changes?
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Prime Minister has so far been rather slippery and spun her way out of answering a direct question that has been put by many Members across this House, so it begs to be asked again: when this House votes on taking no deal off the table, will she and her Government vote for or against that? Yes or no, straight question.
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Peter Grant (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): What happens if the House votes against extending article 50 on 14 March? We would find ourselves having voted to leave on 29 March on the Thursday, but not being able to leave with a deal because we voted against it on the Tuesday and not being able to leave without a deal because we voted against that on the Wednesday. If we have to leave and we cannot leave with a deal and we cannot leave without one, what happens after that? Is it significant that the day after that is the Ides of March?
Leaving the European Union — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: Labor
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Prime Minister again mentioned workers’ rights in her statement, yet the explanatory notes on the four statutory instruments that have been in Committee so far acknowledge that those statutory instruments do indeed weaken workers’ and employment protections. Does that not show that the Government’s promises on workers’ rights are entirely hollow, that the best way to protect workers’ rights is to remain in the European Union, and that demands for a second vote are entirely valid and legitimate?
Department for Education — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: Macroeconomics
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am glad that the Chair of the Select Committee has raised the benefits freeze. Our research through the Library shows that this final year of the benefits freeze is due to raise an extra £1.2 billion in savings for the Treasury, because of increased inflation. Does he not agree that, as a result, this Government should scrap the final year of the freeze?
Department for Education — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: Labor
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On zero-hours contracts, does it alarm the right hon. Gentleman that someone on universal credit who comes out of a zero-hours contract job could be sanctioned, whereas if they were on a legacy benefit, they would not be sanctioned?
Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism — House of Commons, 2019-02-26
Topic: International Affairs
Stewart Malcolm McDonald (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If we have learned anything from the new Labour years it is that proscribing clerics or individual organisations in and of themselves is not enough; it should be part of a wider strategy with allies. So given that we have just had the joint EU-Arab League summit, how many of our allies at that summit intend to follow the Government’s lead?
Supply Chains — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Transportation
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Lang may yer lum reek, Mr Speaker One way the Government are looking to maintain cross-border supply chains is by Government tender to shipping companies, but is the Secretary of State happy about the precedent set for UK businesses? His colleague the Secretary of State for Transport has awarded a £14 million contract to a company with negative assets of nearly £400,000, no ships and terms and conditions copied from a takeaway, while the contract itself seems to have been awarded on questionable legal grounds. Is this the standard he expects for all UK businesses tendering for UK Government contracts?
Supply Chains — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Macroeconomics
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Secretary of State has not answered the question. Will all UK businesses see such largesse from the Government in respect of procurement contracts? One of Seaborne’s directors ran a business that went into liquidation owing HMRC nearly £600,000, using employee benefit trust tax avoidance schemes. According to the director, the Government did not even consider the money owed to Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to be relevant. Is that a sign of a Government who are out of control over Brexit?
Support for Businesses (Scotland) — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on fiscal support for businesses based in Scotland to prepare for the UK leaving the EU without a deal.
Thomas Sheppard (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): A recent report by the Fraser of Allander Institute found that three quarters of Scottish businesses felt that they did not have adequate information to prepare for Brexit. Given that, do the Government now regret rejecting the Scottish National party’s proposal for a £750 million small business support scheme to help them prepare for the eventuality of Brexit?
Universal Credit: Managed Migration — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Social Welfare
Neil Charles Gray (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Thank you for granting this urgent question, Mr Speaker. I commend Labour for securing it. It is important because at the weekend, reading any of the papers, it would have seemed that everything had changed in the minds of Ministers on universal credit, with the Work and Pension Secretary’s apparent U-turn. In actual fact, however, nothing had changed. I am sorry that the Secretary of State is not here to respond, given that the misleading headlines were in her name The Government were of course quite happy to ride that wave of publicity, but yesterday at DWP questions the scale of that so-called U-turn became clear. We now know that at present there are no plans to make any changes to universal credit, which is what everyone is really interested in Delaying the vote on the managed migration of people from legacy benefits to universal credit is a small acceptance from the Government that things may not be well with universal credit. We have six years of evidence and lobbying to show the Secretary of State that. She knows she cannot get away with kicking the can down the road. She knows that changes need to be made and that what is on the line is not just her credibility but the lives of recipients who desperately rely on that support. After all, we never know when it might be us relying on that safety net My question to the Minister is clear and unambiguous, and I hope he will be, too. Will he commit, with the Secretary of State, to putting pressure on the Chancellor to release the money to repair universal credit, starting with ending the two-child policy, stopping the benefits freeze and overhauling the punitive sanctions regime?
Universal Credit: Managed Migration — House of Commons, 2019-01-08
Topic: Social Welfare
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Since as far back as 2013, Inverness and then the rest of my constituency suffered through the pilot and on through the full-service roll-out of universal credit. The new year front page of The Inverness Courier newspaper described the rise of poverty in our community, and that was directly attributed to universal credit. Over nearly six years, the UK Government have failed to listen to any of the agencies, the charities, the council or the people who have been affected. What does the Minister say to those people who have suffered directly over all that time from having their plight ignored by this Government?