argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Clive James Charles Betts (Labour, Centre-left): Yesterday, the Communities and Local Government Committee was looking at business rates and local government finance, and we heard from witnesses from the LGA, CIPFA and the County Councils Network. When we asked whether any other councils were in a similar position to Northamptonshire, the answer we got was not this year, but that many councils are on a cliff edge. With the coming pressures on not just adult social care but children’s services, some councils could fall over that edge next year without additional resources. These comments were made by Conservatives as well as Labour representatives. Is the Minister aware of other councils that will be in this position next year? If so, what action is he going to take to prevent them from getting into that position?
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Elizabeth Louise Kendall (Labour, Centre-left): I was in Northampton yesterday for an event celebrating 100 years since some women first got the vote. The Conservative county council’s appalling mismanagement of services and finances has left local residents deeply concerned. They want and deserve answers. So what specific guarantees can the Minister give that local services will be protected, particularly for children in need, the elderly, and vulnerable adults?
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Macroeconomics
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister boasts of a settlement given to local government. Northamptonshire’s accounts show that in the next five years it will owe £240 million to private finance initiative schemes, of which £77 million is interest alone, paid to shareholders. Does he therefore agree that it is time for a windfall tax on the excessive profits of these companies, so that we can put the money where it is needed—in our public services, not in the pockets of these legal loan sharks?
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Luciana Clare Goldsmith (Berger) (Labour, Centre-left): Since 2010, there have been multiple requests from Liverpool’s leader and MPs inviting Ministers to come and look at our local authority finances. We have even sent train tickets to a previous Secretary of State that have gone to waste. Will the Minister now accept the request and come to see for himself the severe financial strain that Liverpool is experiencing, along with many other councils across the country?
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Lilian Rachel Greenwood (Labour, Centre-left): Northamptonshire County Council has completely failed its citizens and its staff. Northamptonshire MPs have consistently voted for huge cuts to local government funding, and Ministers have refused to listen when Labour Members described the impacts of rising demand for services and even deeper cuts to our councils. When will the Minister listen and respond to the budget crisis facing all councils, including my own City of Nottingham Council?
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister did not answer the question from the Chair of the Select Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield South East (Mr Betts). How many local authorities is he talking to that have concerns about their funding next year?
Public Service Delivery: Northamptonshire — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Social Welfare
Alexander James Jorden Norris (Labour, Centre-left): On 19 December, I extracted a commitment from the Secretary of State, who is not in his place, that the transition grant was finished. As my hon. Friend the Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) said, that grant overwhelmingly went to better-off communities and those with Conservative administrations. Can the Minister assure me that in the light of the calls overnight, following the section 114 notice, for the transition grant to be reinstated, it will not be reinstated?
Women’s Suffrage Centenary — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Education
Sarah Ann Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I am proud to be Croydon’s first female MP and I have been learning this week about the suffragette Dorinda Neligan, who, as well as being arrested outside this place, was the first headteacher of an all-girls school in Croydon, despite complaints about strong-minded women encouraging girls to be dissatisfied with life at home. I am proud to be surrounded by many strong-minded women today. What can the Government do to promote more strong women in our school curriculum, from English literature to history, where we remain woefully under-represented?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is further to my point of order on 24 January, following which I wrote to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government to ask whether the serious allegations set out in The MJ— otherwise known as The Municipal Journal—were true. Those allegations were that the Secretary of State had knowingly misled the House on figures published in the provisional local government settlement and had knowingly misled right hon. and hon. Members in the answers that he had given to their respective questions. Yesterday I received a letter from the Secretary of State confirming that he and the Department knew "the overall scale of the error" but nevertheless "published the provisional settlement on 19th December on the basis of" those "statistics". At no stage in the proceedings did the Secretary of State advise the House that those data were incorrect, and many local authorities based their 2018 budget settings on the figures that he gave in his statement of 19 December, believing them to be correct. That is now creating a damaging lack of trust in the Ministry across local government More seriously, however, the Secretary of State has not publicly apologised to the House, but both "Erskine May" and the ministerial code go further, stating that Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament—that is now the case—must offer their resignation to the Prime Minister. Has the Secretary of State indicated to you, Sir, that he plans to make a personal statement to the House on his conduct in relation to this matter?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Transportation
Andrew Joseph McDonald (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Yesterday, in his statement to the House, the Secretary of State for Transport was asked by the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne): "How good is Lord Adonis’s memory" in connection to the collapse of East Coast. The Secretary of State replied: "I am not a doctor, but I know that there is no record whatever of any ban on National Express continuing to bid for franchises after 2009".—[Official Report, 5 February 2018; Vol. 635, c. 1247.] That was when it defaulted on east coast rail. That is entirely incorrect. On 1 July 2009, Lord Adonis told Parliament that National Express was banned, as recorded in Hansard. He said: "It would clearly be reasonable not to invite a company to bid for future franchises in circumstances where it had recently failed to deliver on a previous franchise. A company which had defaulted in the way that National Express now intends would not have pre-qualified for any previous franchises let by the department."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 1 July 2009; Vol. 712, c. 226.] Lord Adonis has made it clear that the ban was based on advice from the Department The ministerial code says: "Ministers must give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity." Can you advise me, Mr Speaker, of whether the Secretary of State’s statement amounts to a breach of the ministerial code, and how an appropriate apology and correction might be secured from him?
Space Industry Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Technology
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): New clause 2 would ensure that Parliament is kept up to date on negotiations between the UK and the European Union in regard to the UK space industry New clause 2 differs very slightly from new clause 1, which was tabled by the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran). Both new clauses have the same aims. New clause 2 asks the Government to produce a summary of any discussions between the UK Government and the European Union to ensure that Parliament is kept up to date on the progress of the negotiations. Just as importantly, new clause 2 would also provide clarity to the UK’s space industry It goes without saying, or at least it should, that the Government must ensure we get the best possible deal with the EU to help support the UK space industry’s continued growth. That is the whole point of the Bill, and it is why the Labour party is broadly supportive of it. UKspace, the trade association of the UK space industry, claims: "The UK leaving the EU has created significant uncertainty which is already affecting the integrated supply chain, R&D collaboration and joint programmes with other EU countries." As colleagues have pointed out, the UK space industry makes a noteworthy contribution to our economy and employs close to 40,000 people. The industry is currently highly dependent on EU-led space programmes. As a result, the Government must ensure the UK gets a deal that secures the long-term future and growth of our space industry to ensure that the Government’s ambition for the UK to be a leading player in the global space industry is not just all talk and no action The Government provided a report to the Exiting the European Union Committee with a sectoral analysis of the UK space sector after our Opposition day debate on 1 November 2017—it is fair to say that we forced the issue. We welcome the Government publishing that document. However, the Opposition believe the document is not sufficient and that Parliament should be kept up to date with a further summary, which would also give the sector the additional clarity it asks for Any further uncertainty would hinder any potential growth in the UK space industry. New clause 2 is a reasonable and sensible amendment that would require the Government to publish a report setting out a summary within 12 months of Royal Assent, which is absolutely fair.
Space Industry Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Technology
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): I rise to speak to amendment 4, which I tabled, as well as the remaining new clauses and amendments. Amendment 4 would give clarity to the UK’s space industry. As it stands, the Bill makes no provision to ensure that the industry works with the Government to create the regulatory framework that it so badly needs. The amendment would increase the focus on making the UK commercially attractive for potential spaceflight operators. As with new clause 3, the amendment was tabled to press the Government to publish clear regulations for the UK space industry, which is one of the Bill’s key issues Under the amendment, the Secretary of State would have to publish guidance for any forthcoming regulations and hold regular discussions with any potential operator before a licence was issued. The UK’s space industry needs as much clarity as possible; we do not want further uncertainty that may hinder growth. If the Government do not get this right, they could quite possibly deter investment, recruitment and growth in the space sector. It will be interesting to hear the Minister’s views Labour Members generally support the aims of new clause 3, which was tabled by the hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Dr Whitford). The Bill does not set out the criteria for awarding licences, and nor does it describe the procedures in any great detail, which is a problem. When I spoke to new clause 2, I alluded to the fact that Labour wants the UK space industry to grow in the coming years, but the Government need to get this legislation right and have had the opportunity to do so. The industry must be made aware of regulations. We agree that the Government should lay a report before Parliament setting out the proposed licensing regulations in detail. That is fair and reasonable On new clause 3(3), Labour tabled an amendment in Committee that would have ensured that if space activities were established in any of the devolved Administrations of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, their respective environmental agencies and bodies, and respective Governments, would be consulted before any decision was made to grant an operator licence in their jurisdictions. Unfortunately, our amendment was defeated, so I welcome new clause 3, which presses the issue a little further The hon. Member for Central Ayrshire also tabled new clause 4, which deals with the liability issue that came up time and again in Committee.
Space Industry Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Technology
Karl Turner (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Government Front-Bench team for the spirit of co-operation in which the Bill has been handled, and I thank the Minister’s officials, who have worked very hard on it as well. I also thank my colleagues in the other place, where the Bill began, for their very valuable work. They secured a number of important concessions, including the removal of Henry VIII powers, and pressed the Government to introduce a new clause on environmental issues, all of which improved the Bill immensely. It meant that when the Bill came here it was in a much better condition than when it began. I also thank Members who helped to scrutinise the Bill in Committee and those who have made contributions today The Minister has said this, as have Members time and again throughout the passage of the Bill: the UK space industry is an important, growing part of our economy. It was valued at £13.7 billion in 2014-15 and supports almost 40,000 jobs. The Bill will establish a licensing regime for spaceports, space flights and satellite launches, which is currently missing from the statute book, and put in place a regulatory framework to allow the further expansion of the industry. For that reason, the Opposition support and welcome the Bill.
Housing, Planning and the Green Belt — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Government Operations
Matthew Toby Perkins (Labour, Centre-left): I am much happier with where the right hon. Gentleman is finishing his speech than I was with his position six or seven minutes ago. It seems that London has doubled in size during my lifetime, but the major cities of the north have hardly changed. If the message that the Government get today is that we need continually to expand the size of London, I agree entirely that we will not build our way out of this problem, as we will just continue to feed that demand. The solution has to be investment in infrastructure and skills all around the country, not just focused on London.
Mount Oswald Estate — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Technology
Roberta Carol Blackman-Woods (Labour, Centre-left): I hope you will bear with me, Madam Deputy Speaker, while I present these two petitions. The first is from the residents of the Mount Oswald estate in Durham The petition states: The petition of residents of Mount Oswald Estate in Durham, Declares that the new development, built by David Wilson Homes, where there are residents who lack any form of acceptable broadband service; further that the estate’s phone lines are currently connected to a cabinet over 2 km away, resulting in a typical broadband speed of 0-3 megabits per second, well below the standard broadband speed of 17 megabits per second; further that this is well below the broadband service that should be expected in a new-build development with a city-centre postcode; further that with the development of several hundred new homes immediately adjacent to the Mount Oswald Estate the broadband speeds are likely to deteriorate further without any action The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to make provision for the installation of a new fibre-enabled cabinet in the immediate vicinity of the Mount Oswald Estate to ensure a future-proof service for all current and future residents of the estate And the petitioners remain, etc [P002109]
Sherburn Hill School, County Durham — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Education
Roberta Carol Blackman-Woods (Labour, Centre-left): The second petition is from the residents of Sherburn Hill on the closure of Sherburn Hill School. They believe that Durham County Council has not guaranteed that all its pupils will be eligible for transport-to-school funds The petition states: The petition of residents of Sherburn Hill, Declares that the proposed closure of Sherburn Hill school in County Durham is contrary to the wishes of the local residents and that children will have to attend other schools in other villages; further that the community at Sherburn Hill have already lost all other existing community facilities, including a Sure Start centre and a community centre, and that the closure of this school will represent the closure of the last communal indoor space in the village; further that Durham County Council have not fully investigated other options for keeping the school open The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to call on Durham County Council to reconsider the decision to close Sherburn Hill school And the petitioners remain, etc [P002108]
Autism: Educational Outcomes — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Education
Melanie Onn (Labour, Centre-left): I commend the hon. Lady on the report of her inquiry, which she co-chaired with the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Huw Merriman) Cora Leeson, who is a passionate campaigner and advocate for children with autism in my constituency, contacted me after the launch of the report to highlight her concern about the number of fixed-term exclusions from school of children with unidentified SEN, including those with autism. Does the hon. Lady share my concern about the educational attainment of children who are being excluded because they have not received a diagnosis or because, if they do have a diagnosis, they are not receiving appropriate support within mainstream schooling?
Autism: Educational Outcomes — House of Commons, 2018-02-06
Topic: Education
Melanie Onn (Labour, Centre-left): Can the Minister tell us how long it takes between a school identifying that a child has an issue and that child receiving the intervention and support that they require? In too many areas throughout the country, it is taking far too long.
Refugees (Family Reunion) (No.2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Government Operations
Lloyd Russell-Moyle (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend points out the case in Lewisham. Does she acknowledge that that is the case with Labour-led councils across the country, which are offering to put more people up, but the Government are not using those places? The Government need to take action immediately to use those places.
Refugees (Family Reunion) (No.2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: International Affairs
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): Does the hon. Gentleman agree that many excellent volunteers, including from the UK, have joined others in the Mediterranean to assist those people in desperate need? Sometimes that part of the world looks more like a cemetery than somewhere where we are saving lives.
Refugees (Family Reunion) (No.2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Social Welfare
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I just do not follow the hon. Gentleman’s argument. If he is basically arguing that any kind of family reunion will somehow act as a pull factor and therefore should not happen, that would be an argument for having no family reunion for anybody at all—not for any adult, any husband or any wife. But of course, nobody thinks that. Everybody thinks that family reunion is important and that we must make sure we can keep families together.
Refugees (Family Reunion) (No.2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Social Welfare
Martin David Whitfield (Labour, Centre-left): Does the hon. Lady not agree that she has succinctly and successfully described the benefit that families together can bring as they try to create a life in this country? All the Bill would do is extend the option for families to be together and to work in constituencies and bring economic benefit to us all.
Unpaid Trial Work Periods (Prohibition) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Labor
Mark Richard Tami (Labour, Centre-left): Does the hon. Gentleman agree that unfortunately, in perhaps only a small number of companies, one trialist is replaced by another and then another, and so on? Those companies use trial shifts as a way of getting free work.
Unpaid Trial Work Periods (Prohibition) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Education
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is being extremely gracious. I congratulate him—as I am sure do most Members in this House—on bringing this Bill before us today. We have just had National Apprenticeship Week. Not least of the evils of the present situation, is that, first, it prevents the sort of serial offenders that he is describing from doing something decent such as offering an apprenticeship, and secondly, it hides them from exposure for not taking such things forward in the first place.
Unpaid Trial Work Periods (Prohibition) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Labor
Hugh Lawrence Gaffney (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. Does he agree that working conditions are deteriorating? I have known sons and daughters—I have known many people—who have suffered the abuse of unpaid work. That is why I strongly support the trade union movement. I suggest that everybody should get into the trade union movement to stop the abuse of workers. If the Tory Prime Minister was prepared to put money where her mouth is, she would support these workers and stop this practice.
Unpaid Trial Work Periods (Prohibition) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Labor
Lloyd Russell-Moyle (Labour, Centre-left): Does the hon. Gentleman recognise Unite community section, which has low rates specifically to protect those people who are out of work? There are options in the union sector to protect people who are on low wages or no wage.
Unpaid Trial Work Periods (Prohibition) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Labor
Martin David Whitfield (Labour, Centre-left): I fully support this Bill, as I have from the outset. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that as well as the fact that this work is unpaid, there is great danger with regard to health and safety, training, other staff members, and members of the public? Unscrupulous employers are putting everybody in danger, and also damaging the reputation of the good employers who do not engage in this.
Unpaid Trial Work Periods (Prohibition) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-03-16
Topic: Labor
Ruth Margaret Cadbury (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the hon. Gentleman for bringing this important Bill forward. I was not really aware of this issue until, when my eldest son was a teenager, a couple of his friends worked several unpaid shifts in a restaurant. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this is particularly rife in the hospitality industry, which many of us partake of and spend money in? If people were more aware of the issue and the need to plug the hole in existing employment legislation, they would support the Bill. Should not all Members support the Bill?