argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Roderick James Nugent Stewart (Conservative, Centre-right): I am tempted to reflect on the question from my hon. Friend the Chair of the Justice Committee. There is a central issue and challenge at the heart of the Bill. Dealing with this perfect storm of problems—unprovable conditions, high payments, recoverable costs and the actions of the insurance industry—is not easily done through primary legislation, so I pay tribute to right hon. and hon. Members on both sides for their focus on not just the primary legislation but elements of secondary legislation and some of the requirements around it The only way this reform will work—the only way to prevent excessive whiplash claims—is by being very nimble in anticipating exactly how claims management companies will operate and predicting how this phenomenon could change in the future. As my hon. Friend has pointed out, that means putting in place an absolute insistence that someone must have a medical examination. At the moment, many of these claims are settled without anybody having any medical examination at all. There must be a medical examination, and it must be conducted by a qualified GP, who is currently allocated through the portal in a random fashion so that people are not in a position to be able to conspire in any way as a result of the kind of doctor whom they are given. An approved GP with the right kind of training, or a medical specialist of another sort, will then give a prognosis that will allow them to proceed in a much more straightforward way That brings us to the second aspect, which, again, is not primarily a question of primary legislation. I refer to the design of the online portal. It is important to ensure that, as cases move to the small claims court, people have a straightforward, intuitive way of logging claims. One of the things that we will be doing over the next year is testing and retesting the portal in as many ways as we can to ensure that it actually works.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Julian Carlton Knight (Conservative, Centre-right): Is it not the case that the mechanics of the discount rate as it was constituted by the Lord Chancellor before the previous one effectively mean that claimants are estimated to be receiving substantially more than 100% entitlement, and that is not what the system is about? We need a system that reflects current investment strategies and current investment returns.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Mixed Topics
Roderick James Nugent Stewart (Conservative, Centre-right): This is a serious issue. The intention of the award made by the court is to provide 100% compensation. In other words, the intent of the court is to make sure that catastrophically injured victims receive the sum of money required to cover their lifetime care costs or loss of earnings. The best way of doing this is through a periodic payment order, which is why we have asked the Master of the Rolls and his committee to look at the use of PPOs. Under such orders, the real costs of people’s care year on year to the moment of their death will be covered; that is how the PPO operates. There is no need to give people a lump sum and speculate somehow on how long they are going to live In all cases we would encourage people to make much more use of PPOs. It is true that victims often do not want to accept PPOs. They would rather accept a lump sum either because they believe they can invest it and potentially generate more money or because they feel that were they to die prematurely they could pass on that lump sum to their relatives, but that is not the intention of the award. The award is designed to produce 100% compensation for their care costs.
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Mixed Topics
Mary Josephine Robinson (Conservative, Centre-right): We must get this right for people who have had those catastrophic injuries; their lives are changed forever. Getting this discount rate right is also important because it will affect how they will invest. What more can we do to ensure that they are not forced into, or tempted to, make riskier investments over the course of their lifetime, which will affect their care?
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Kevin Paul Hollinrake (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I was not going to speak for the insurance companies. I was going to ask whether he welcomed the fact that the Bill will lower the price of insurance for consumers. Does he not welcome that?
Civil Liability Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. I gently say to the shadow Secretary of State, who has come on later than he might have expected to speak—the Minister was within his rights to speak for an unusually long time for Third Reading—that the hon. Member for Belfast South (Emma Little Pengelly) indicated to me several hours ago that she wished to contribute on Third Reading. It would be most unfortunate if there were not an opportunity for Back-Bench Members to speak. I am not blaming the hon. Gentleman, but I ask him whether he might take account of the interest on both sides of the House.
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): We come to motion 9. Not moved. SITTING IN WESTMINSTER HALL (29 OCTOBER) Ordered, That, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No 10(1)(a), the sitting in Westminster Hall on Monday 29 October shall begin at 5.30 pm and may then continue for up to three hours.—(Iain Stewart.) Delegated Legislation (Committees) Ordered, That the motion in the name of Andrea Leadsom relating to the Electoral Commission be referred to a Delegated Legislation Committee.—(Iain Stewart.)
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Other
Edward Julian Egerton Leigh (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I notice that the Government decided not to move motion 9 on time limits on speeches. I was ready to object to it, despite being a member of the Procedure Committee, because I think that it affects intimately the life of many Members of Parliament I want to get your advice, Mr Speaker, which is why I think this is a genuine point of order. If I had simply objected to the motion, presumably there would have been a deferred Division, but what I would really like is a debate, because I think that Members are very interested in time limits on speeches. How can we get a debate about this on the Floor of the House?
Business without Debate — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Repeated objection could secure the outcome that the hon. Gentleman seeks. I should just say, for the purposes of clarification, that the motion in question was not deferrable. If memory serves me correctly, motions 3 to 8 were potentially deferrable, but motion 9, which excited the hon. Gentleman to the point that he wished to argue against it and which was not moved by the Government, was not a motion subject to a deferred Division. It was what is known in the trade—not least by our previously bewigged friends who advise the Chair—as a "nod or nothing", which means that it proceeds on the basis that nobody objects to it, but if somebody objects to it, it does not proceed. If it comes forward on the same basis again and the hon. Gentleman objects—and possibly even without it coming forward on that basis again—time could well be found for a debate. At that point, he would be able to explain, doubtless eloquently and possibly at length, why he was opposed to it. I hope that that is helpful to him, and when he repairs home, he can tell Lady Leigh all about it.
Bredbury Parkway Industrial Estate Extension — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Housing
William Peter Wragg (Conservative, Centre-right): I rise to present a petition in similar terms to that presented by my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne). It has been a pleasure to work with him—he and I are equally committed to the green belt in Stockport and Tameside respectively and wish to encourage a brownfield-first policy. This petition, to protect green-belt land near the Bredbury industrial estate, is added to the similar petitions signed by thousands of my constituents demanding that the Greater Manchester spatial framework is radically redrawn. It is a pleasure for me to present it on behalf of my constituents Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Declares that proposals to extend the Bredbury Parkway Industrial Estate deep into the Tame Valley would involve large-scale developments on the Green Belt land, which is a valuable barrier to urban sprawl and is hugely valued by local people, particularly in the areas of Bredbury, Woodley, Denton and Tameside; further declares that this development would destroy the openness of this section of the Tame Valley and damage the visual amenity from the Haughton Dale and Hulme’s Wood Local Nature Reserves; further declare concerns over HGV traffic in the area and the impact that the proposals would have on an already congested Stockport Road and Ashton Road, and the associated effects on the environment. The petitioners oppose plans to extend the Bredbury Parkway Industrial Estate. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, Tameside Council and the Department for Communities and Local Government no to support the extension of the Bredbury Parkway Industrial Estate; and to further urge that the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) must follow principles of a ‘Brownfield First’ strategy, so that previously developed land, including derelict or unused sites, must be fully considered before Green Belt is released for development. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P002274]
Elder Abuse — House of Commons, 2018-10-23
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robert Alexander Courts (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech and being generous with his time, which I appreciate is limited. I have also had experience of constituents raising such matters, and particularly financial abuse of the elderly. To declare an interest, I also used to prosecute for Oxfordshire trading standards and came across many people who had been abused in that sense There is one category that my hon. Friend has not mentioned: sometimes in their own homes, people can be befriended by strangers for the precise purpose of exploiting and abusing them. Does he condemn that as much as I do—I am sure he does—and will he commend and encourage the volunteer support groups who do so much to ensure that people are not isolated and that such problems are uncovered?
Drug-related Harm — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Charles Brine (Conservative, Centre-right): The truth is that we work together. In July 2017, the Government published a comprehensive new drugs strategy, setting out what we think is a balanced approach that brings together the police, health, and community and global partners to tackle the illicit drugs trade, and to protect the most vulnerable in our societies who are struggling with drug dependency and help them to recover and turn their lives around. I know the hon. Gentleman takes a very different view, but that is our approach.
Childhood Obesity — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Mixed Topics
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s work at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on this matter. It is critical that we have a cross-Government approach. The obesity plan is led by the Department of Health and Social Care, but it is a cross-Government plan. There is a whole range of actions we need to take—from education through to culture and broadcasting—to make sure we get it right.
Childhood Obesity — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): I am sure that they will grow into that, Mr Speaker I pay tribute to the work that the hon. Gentleman has done, which I have watched with admiration from elsewhere. I will certainly look at the point that he raises, which is very important, and we will take a fully evidence-based approach.
Childhood Obesity — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Civil Rights
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): I know that the Secretary of State has a track record of evidence-free, nanny-state policies from his time in DCMS. Can we expect more of the same in his new Department, or is he going to try out some Conservative principles, such as individual freedom, and individual and parental responsibility?
Leaving the EU — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Paul Barclay (Conservative, Centre-right): We will remain committed to attracting the brightest and best. The hon. Lady says that her area is "beleaguered"; I remind her that the Kent and Medway sustainability and transformation partnership received £101.2 million more than it received in the previous year.
Leaving the EU — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Immigration
Stephen Paul Barclay (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend has raised an extremely important point. The Home Secretary recently announced a settlement scheme to enable those staff from the European economic area to remain. However, it is also important for us not to scare EU nationals, and to point out that there are now 4,500 more non-UK EU nationals working in the NHS than there were two years ago, at the time of the referendum. There is often a sense that there are fewer, but that is not the case.
Leaving the EU — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
Questions: The number of vulnerable adults in Newcastle is rising by 20% each year. The over-85 population is set to rise by 60% in the next decade, and additional cost pressures will mean £30 million in extra costs over the next three years. How is Newcastle City Council supposed to meet the adult social care budget, given the cuts that have been made in it? I ask the Minister please not to mention the adult social care precept, because it does not even begin to cover those costs.
Stephen Paul Barclay (Conservative, Centre-right): This is a near instantaneous correction, Mr Speaker, to recognise that what I should have clarified is that, following the vote in the House, it is our intention to work as closely as possible with that, and we recognise the point the hon. Lady makes.
Draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What assessment he has made of the extent to which the draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order 2018 meets his Department’s policy objectives on equality.
Jacqueline Doyle-Price (Conservative, Centre-right): The revised remedial order laid last week addresses the potential inequalities that were identified by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, but it also goes further, ensuring that a sole applicant biologically related to the child will always be able to apply for a parental order regardless of their relationship status. That is a step forward for equality.
Draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What assessment he has made of the extent to which the draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order 2018 meets his Department’s policy objectives on equality.
Andrew Theakstone Percy (Conservative, Centre-right): On behalf of the all-party parliamentary group on surrogacy, I thank the Minister for meeting us recently and for laying the order, which removes an inequality. Surrogacy helps to build families, be they heterosexual, same-sex or individuals, so what more can she do to promote it?
Draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
Questions: What assessment he has made of the extent to which the draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order 2018 meets his Department’s policy objectives on equality.
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I call Bim Afolami. Not here. This is a rum state of affairs. I hope the fellow is all right. He was here earlier, but he has beetled out of the Chamber at a most inopportune moment. Well, there is nothing to be done, and the grouping breaks down, but I hope Bim’s okay. Reports would be welcome.
Cancer Strategy — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): It is very good of the hon. Member for Hitchin and Harpenden to drop back in on us. Unfortunately, he beetled out of the Chamber at a most inopportune moment, just before his question was reached. If he sits there, and if he is a good boy, we might get to him in due course. We have moved on now, which is most unfortunate.
Artificial Intelligence — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): As the Clerk advises—his is the intellectual copyright—the hon. Gentleman has used his intelligence artificially to shoehorn his preoccupation into a question to which it has no other relation. But he has got away with it on this occasion, as it is the last day and we are all in a summer mood.
Children's Mental Health: Social Media — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Mixed Topics
Mary Josephine Robinson (Conservative, Centre-right): The longer people spend online, the more likely they are to experience cyber-bullying. Research by Childline, a service of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, shows that the number of young people seeking counselling as a result of online bullying has increased by 88% in just five years. What are the Government doing to improve research on this issue and to better understand the potential harms?
Children's Mental Health: Social Media — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
Jacqueline Doyle-Price (Conservative, Centre-right): Respectfully, I say to the hon. Lady that this is a response to the consultation on the Green Paper, which has had considerable debate in this House. The suggestion that we have avoided scrutiny really does not pass.
Children's Mental Health: Social Media — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I know the hon. Gentleman, who has returned to the Chamber in rude health, is in fact deeply grateful to me for my generosity in accommodating him, notwithstanding his rather eccentric disappearance, and the fact that he did not mention it was a mere oversight.
Children's Mental Health: Social Media — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
Jacqueline Doyle-Price (Conservative, Centre-right): I would be more than happy to engage with the hon. Gentleman and the all-party group on this issue, because it is important we do as much as we can to learn and to get as much evidence as possible in this area.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Mixed Topics
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes, the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We published information on this issue just last week. We absolutely will consult the Scottish Government and all interested stakeholders. It is a very important matter to get right.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Other
Questions: Last year, 7.3 million people were prescribed antidepressants, including more than 70,000 children. That is an increase of more than 500% in the past 20 years. In welcoming the Secretary of State’s announcement on social prescribing, may I, as co-chair of the all-party group on mindfulness, ask him what part mindfulness and other evidence-based non-drug options will play in the strategy? Would he like to undertake a mindfulness course, and in doing so join the now more than 150 other MPs and Lords who have done so at Westminster?; Last month, a constituent contacted me about the care of her adult son who needed to be admitted to hospital under the Mental Health Act 2007. She was told that no beds were available anywhere in the country. The following day, a bed was identified but when, after three hours’ wait, the ambulance had not arrived, the bed was filled by another patient. Three days later, he was finally admitted to hospital. The head of mental health at Nottingham City Council told me that this is not an infrequent occurrence. Secretary of State, how is this an acceptable standard of mental healthcare?; Despite previous reassurances from Health Ministers, I continue to receive reports from constituents of waiting times for referrals to child and adolescent mental health services in excess of nine months and, with an extremely high threshold for support, many are turned away. The Government spend less than 1% of the NHS budget on children’s mental health. When will the Department stop failing our children and gives CAMHS the investment that it desperately needs?; Three times more people die by suicide each year than in road accidents. Today, Samaritans volunteers across the UK are taking part in its awareness campaign, “The Big Listen”. What action is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that local agencies are encouraged and resourced to carry out awareness-raising work to get out the message that suicide is preventable, not inevitable, in line with NICE’s draft guidelines?; To help to reduce childhood obesity, 76% of people support a ban on junk food adverts before 9 o’clock, but the consultation on this is going into the middle distance. Critics would say that the Government are dragging their feet. By when will we see this ban finally put into place?
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): We announced that we will be consulting less than a month ago. I have been closely involved in this in my previous role, as well as in this one. We will ensure that we take an evidence-based approach, but I am determined that we proceed.
Public Sector Pay — House of Commons, 2018-07-24
Topic: Mixed Topics
Elizabeth Mary Truss (Conservative, Centre-right): I am delighted to have this opportunity to discuss today’s announcements of public sector pay rises Last September, I informed the House that we would scrap the cap, and now we are delivering on that commitment. What we are announcing today amounts to the biggest pay rise in almost 10 years for about 1 million public workers across Britain, including teachers, armed forces personnel, prison officers, police, doctors and dentists. This comes on top of the positive news we were able to announce in March that 1 million nurses, midwives, porters and other NHS staff would receive a 6.5% pay rise over three years. That deal was a benchmark example of where high pay awards are agreed in return for modernisation of terms and conditions We were able to announce these pay rises thanks only to the hard work of the British people, which has brought down the deficit by over three quarters and allowed us to reach the point where the debt will begin to fall this year. We did not listen to the siren calls from the Opposition for damaging splurges, and that is why today we are able to scrap the cap and increase public sector pay. These new pay deals represent what this Government are about. They are affordable and responsible, while making sure that we continue to provide the public with world-class public services. They also reward our hard-working public servants It is great, on the final day of this Session of Parliament, that we are able to give every person who works in the public sector positive news on which to enjoy their summer.