argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Kellingley Colliery — House of Commons, 2015-12-09
Topic: Labor
Dennis Edward Skinner (Labour, Centre-left): It is even worse than that, because less than two years ago the coalition Government took £700 million out of the miners’ pension scheme. All they wanted was about £30 million or £40 million. They could have kept the pit going until all the reserves had been worked out.
Kellingley Colliery — House of Commons, 2015-12-09
Topic: Energy
Ian Lavery (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is basically trying to say that coal is dead and finished. At a time when this Government are allowing the closure of the last deep mine and putting 450 people on the dole in his constituency, we as a country and as a nation are still importing more than 40 million tonnes of coal. What is this all about?
Kellingley Colliery — House of Commons, 2015-12-09
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The fixed date that the Minister mentions under the EU state aid rules would have been 2018, which is in three years’ time. That was not a reason not to go down the EU state aid route. The deal she mentions that was supposedly the quickest route to go down took more than six months to resolve. The briefing that she has received from her civil servants does not seem to stack up.
Kellingley Colliery — House of Commons, 2015-12-09
Topic: Environment
Dennis Edward Skinner (Labour, Centre-left): There is another figure that the Minister is failing to mention. She is trying to argue that this Conservative Government have tried to save the pit. In truth, since 1984, 170 pits have closed, including Kellingley, and fewer than 10 of them were closed during the 13 years of the Labour Government. I think that tells a story: the Tories like closing pits.
Rape and Domestic Violence — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): Despite claims of the highest number of convictions ever, the fact is that in the last year the number of convictions for rape, domestic abuse and other serious sexual offences has fallen. What is the Solicitor General going to do to turn those worrying figures around?
Rape and Domestic Violence — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Catherine McKinnell (Labour, Centre-left): Successfully prosecuting rape and domestic violence cases clearly requires a properly resourced CPS, yet the budget has been slashed by 25% since 2010 and the rate of ineffective and cracked trials owing to prosecution issues is at a five-year high. With senior respected personnel leaving and expressing grave concerns, do the Solicitor General and the Attorney General really believe that the CPS can sustain more cuts on the same scale and still deliver justice?
Court Time — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Law and Crime
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker A constituent of mine who is a very competent manager recently did jury service. He said the court system was medieval and it was about time someone came in and organised it better, managed it better and gave a real return to the taxpayer, with better justice delivered quickly.
Pregnancy and Maternity Discrimination — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Labor
Rebecca Long-Bailey (Labour, Centre-left): Many women across Salford and Eccles have returned to work after maternity leave with a very uneasy feeling about whether they have a job. The report to which the right hon. Lady refers has found that women returning from maternity leave are even more likely to face discrimination in the workplace than they were a decade ago. What assurances can she offer people in Salford and Eccles that this will not be the case in generations to come?
Working Families Tax Credit — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: What comparative assessment she has made of the potential effect on women and men of proposed changes to working families tax credit; and if she will make a statement.
Fiona Margaret Mactaggart (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister says that it has been considered, but it has not been acted upon. We know that benefits such as child tax credit are twice as big a proportion of women’s income as they are of men’s. He will recall that in August 2014 the Prime Minister said that "every single domestic policy that government comes up with will be examined for its impact on the family." What was the examination in relation to child tax credit, and what has he done about it?
Women’s Refuges — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Social Welfare
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): During my annual community consultation over the recent recess, lots of women constituents raised concerns about the future of refuges, recognising that local authority funding was being stretched to breaking point, particularly in big cities such as Sheffield. The Government’s recent £10 million cash injection is a sticking plaster that will only delay closures. Will the Minister use the forthcoming spending review to put in place a long-term funding solution for the national network of refuges?
Redcar Steelworks — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Labor
Kevin Denis Brennan (Labour, Centre-left): One has to ask what moral universe Ministers inhabit if they think that it is acceptable to spin about the financial package for workers at Redcar. We have just heard an admission from the Minister that the figure is not £80 million, which is the figure that the Government have used and widely publicised. She now claims that there is £50 million of new money, but we need to look more closely at that. How much of that money is from the Work programme? How much is money that Ministers have put aside from the Government’s resources as new money to help the workers at Redcar, and how much is just recycled spin? That is what we have been getting from the Minister There are still questions to answer—I will not go on for too long because of what you said earlier, Mr Speaker—[Interruption.] The Minister said "Oh good". I bet she did. She has not said anything to answer questions about the clean-up of the site, which she was asked earlier this week and today. This country needs an industrial strategy. We are losing an irreplaceable strategic national asset without a fight from our country’s Government, and that is an unforgiveable betrayal.
Redcar Steelworks — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Government Operations
Andrew Joseph McDonald (Labour, Centre-left): Why is the Minister not listening to the two consortia that have come forward with bids at the last minute? They should be given the opportunity to formulate those bids and the Government should be keeping it going. It is no good doing the Pontius Pilate act and just washing your hands of the responsibility. Why are Ministers privately supporting mothballing, yet not getting that support from the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister? If you can’t answer this, what are you there for? What’s your purpose if you don’t step up?
Redcar Steelworks — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Labor
Roberta Carol Blackman-Woods (Labour, Centre-left): This is not the first time the north-east has suffered the closure of steelworks under a Conservative Government. As well as being devastating for those communities, it can take a long time for people to move into alternative employment. The Minister mentioned short-term training, but will she stay with those workers for the longer term to ensure they find new employment?
Redcar Steelworks — House of Commons, 2015-10-15
Topic: Macroeconomics
Nicklaus Thomas-Symonds (Labour, Centre-left): It was the Tory Lord Heseltine, as he now is, who said that to help British business he would "intervene before breakfast, before lunch, before tea and before dinner. And…get up next morning to start again." Might the Minister not regret the fact that she did not save steelmaking on Teesside, which would have been far better for our national economy than the package that she has announced today?
Climate Change — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: International Affairs
Holly Jamie Walker-Lynch (Labour, Centre-left): In 2015 we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to make progress on both international development and climate change. In countries such as Bangladesh and in regions of Africa, the connection between climate change and child marriage is stark. Desperate families faced with failing crops, flooding and extreme weather impacting on their livelihoods and homes are deciding to see their daughters married earlier and earlier, in the hope that they will at least have a roof over their heads and food to eat. Too often that gamble is leaving girls at risk—
Refugees (Registration of Children) — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Social Welfare
Michael Joseph Patrick Kane (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for his answer about the £44 million, but what action will the Government take on the specific issue of the complexity and cost of registering stateless children? We do not want anyone to be left behind. Will he come back to the House with a more specific answer to the question?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): I start by associating myself with the Prime Minister’s remarks about Michael Meacher. On behalf of the Labour party, his constituents and a much wider community, I express our condolences to his family. I spoke to them last night and asked them how they would like Michael to be remembered. They thought about it and sent me a very nice message, which I would like to read out, if I may, Mr Speaker. It is quite brief, but very poignant. As "Memories of Michael", they provided this statement: "When I was young…one of the things he frequently said to me was that people went into politics because they had principles and wanted to change things to make the world better, but that in order to get into power they would often compromise on their principles and that this could happen again and again until, if they eventually did get into power, they would have become so compromised that they would do nothing with it." Those of us who knew Michael knew him as a decent, hard-working, passionate and profound man. He represented his constituency with diligence and distinction for 45 years. He was a brilliant Environment Minister, as the Prime Minister pointed out, and he was totally committed to parliamentary democracy and to this Parliament holding Governments—all Governments—to account. He was also a lifelong campaigner against injustice and poverty. We remember Michael for all of those things. We express our condolences and we express our sympathies to his family at this very difficult time. His will be a hard act to follow, but we will do our best Following the events in the other place on Monday evening and the rather belated acceptance by the Prime Minister of the result there, can he now guarantee to the House and to the wider country that nobody will be worse off next year as a result of cuts to working tax credits?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): This is the time when we ask questions to the Prime Minister on behalf of the people of this country—[Interruption.] Mr Speaker, if I may continue. People are very worried about what is going to happen to them next April, so what exactly does the Prime Minister mean? He is considering it and there is an autumn statement coming up, but we thought he was committed to not cutting tax credits. Is he going to cut them or not? Are people going to be worse off or not in April next year? He must know the answer.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): It is very interesting that the Prime Minister still refuses to answer the fundamental question. This is not a constitutional crisis; it is a crisis for 3 million families in this country who are very worried about what is going to happen next April Just before the last election, when asked on the BBC’s "World at One" whether he was going to cut tax credits, the former Chief Whip, now the Justice Secretary, said: "we are not going to cut them." Why did he say that?
West Midlands Combined Authority — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Questions: If he will have discussions with the Secretaries of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and for Communities and Local Government to determine the progress of the Midlands Engine initiative and the proposed West Midlands combined authority.
Ian Austin (Labour, Centre-left): May I tell the Prime Minister and the Chancellor that there is strong support from all the parties, the local enterprise partnerships, business and local authorities right across the west midlands for a properly funded and significant devolution deal to strengthen the economy, to boost productivity, to get the brownfield sites redeveloped and to tackle congestion, so that we can transform the west midlands, with more jobs, better skills, quicker transport links and new homes?
Commons Financial Privilege — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Government Operations
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): It is clear that the Government intend to give the House of Lords a kicking, but they should remember, as they fashion this pretend constitutional crisis, that the vast majority of people in this country applauded the Lords on Monday, because the measure was not in the Government’s manifesto. Does the Leader of the House see no irony at all in getting a Member of the House of Lords—and, for that matter, a hereditary peer—to review the financial privilege of the House of Commons? Is this the right person for the task? After all, in 1999, Lord Strathclyde said of the convention that the House of Lords did not strike down statutory instruments: "I declare this convention dead." That same day, he and the Lords voted down two Labour Government statutory instruments. Now he thinks that it is an utter disgrace to do so. Is there one rule for Tory regulations and another for Labour ones? Is he now a convert or frankly just a hypocrite?
Commons Financial Privilege — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Government Operations
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): I withdraw that term unreservedly, Mr Speaker; I presume that he is a convert Why are there no representatives of other parties or of the House of Commons on the review panel? Would it not be better for this House to conduct its own inquiry into the operation of secondary legislation? Could not the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, whose admirable Chairman is in the Chamber now, do the job far better Is there not a far simpler means of guaranteeing the financial privilege of the Commons? The Government should stop relying on secondary legislation and introduce properly scrutinised primary legislation as money Bills that are covered by the Parliament Act instead. In all honesty, is it not a disgrace that measures affecting 3.2 million people should be decided in a 90-minute debate with no opportunity for amendment? There is a very simple principle here: money Bills do not receive scrutiny in the Lords, so they get extra time in the House of Commons; secondary legislation does not get much time in the Commons, so it does receive consideration in the Lords Does the Leader of the House not realise that the Lords had the power they did on Monday only because the Government tried to sidestep scrutiny by using secondary legislation dependent on the Tax Credits Act 2002, section 66 of which specifies that changes to tax credit rates must be approved by both Houses of Parliament? As things stand, the Government rely on hundreds of Acts that have the same provision. Does the Leader of the House intend to make retrospective amendments to each and every one of those Acts, and will he use the Parliament Act to drive that through We have very few checks to Executive power in this country. If we do not protect our constitution, it is not worth the paper it is not written on. There is a real danger that if Parliament as a whole lets the Government of the day dismantle every check and balance, they will no longer be governing by consent—and that really would be a constitutional crisis.
Commons Financial Privilege — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Government Operations
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Leader of the House ensure that the review includes whether the House of Lords has the right to vote down measures introduced by a Government who said that they would not take such measures? Secondly, will the members of the review panel be paid a daily rate? If so, will it be higher than the minimum wage?
Commons Financial Privilege — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): The Leader of the House has explained why the measures were not in a Finance Bill. He seems to be confused: he seems to believe that the big bill attached to tax credits makes them a finance measure. If we follow his logic, no Bill that involves spending could go to the other place, be it on legal aid or HS2.
Commons Financial Privilege — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Government Operations
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Leader of the House not accept that the other place has a constitutional role to provide pause to this House when it feels that we have taken a decision that is wrong and out of sync with the feelings of the country? Why should we take seriously his views on the powers of the other place, and indeed the views of Government Members, given that he is continuing to pack that House with 50-odd new peers at the same time as slashing the number of elected Members of this House by 50?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Education
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. At Prime Minister’s questions today the Prime Minister said that the previous Labour Government failed to act on introducing free school meals. That is not correct. Having been Schools Minister in that Government, I know that we introduced three pilots for free schools meals for all primary school pupils in Durham, Wolverhampton and Newham, and the plan had been to roll them out in September 2010. When the coalition Government came into office, however, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats cancelled the scheme. Is it possible to have the record corrected, Mr Speaker?
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Energy
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): I was fairly astonished to read the comments from the Minister for what the Government call the "northern powerhouse". He said that what has happened to Redcar was a "tragic distraction" from his work on the northern powerhouse—I had hoped that he would have seen it as part of his job to try to get the Government to take much earlier action to head off an entirely foreseeable occurrence.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): I suspect that the nationalisation of the steel industry took place before I was born, and we could have a history lesson on that. There are many examples of EU Governments who do a much better job at preserving their steel industries than this Government appear to have done so far.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: International Affairs
Wayne David (Labour, Centre-left): The House of Commons Library has produced a paper on European state aid. It states clearly that Germany, for example, gives more than twice the amount of state aid that is provided in this country. Moreover, a raft of indirect state aids are given in Germany, but this Government have decided not to do that in this country.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Energy
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend’s practical suggestion should be considered with great seriousness not only by the Government but by the EU The steel summit in Rotherham was convened only following the Backbench Business Committee debate, and it ended with more job losses and no significant Government announcements. Far from keeping the House informed as the crisis has unfolded, the Government have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the House to answer urgent question after urgent question Steel is an energy intensive industry that inevitably results in extra costs being placed on it for environmental reasons, but the Government have the power to lower energy costs for steel producers through implementing the energy intensive industry compensation package immediately.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: International Affairs
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): In a minute Despite being announced in the Chancellor’s autumn statement in 2011, the most substantial part of this package is still waiting to be implemented. Ministers admitted in a parliamentary question to my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) that they have not even bothered to raise the issue with the Commission in the last 12 months. It is clear that the Government have shown no leadership in Europe, and the Business Secretary is visiting the Commission for the first time today—better late than never I suppose, but what on earth has taken him so long? I welcome his visit, and I trust he will emerge from the Commission with some tangible progress—after all the foot dragging and inaction, it is about time he did.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Environment
Tom Blenkinsop (Labour, Centre-left): The EU emissions trading system has already been compensated—that is an EU-wide market taxation system—and we are talking about the carbon price floor, which was introduced by the Chancellor. He did not consult industry or talk to the European Union, and he had to go to Brussels—well, we do not know whether anyone has gone there yet; we presume the Business Secretary is there today—to get compensation for a tax that this Government introduced unilaterally and without any consultation with industry. That is the issue. We are talking about a compensation package for a British tax.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend represents many constituents directly affected by the closure in Redcar, as does my hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Anna Turley), and he demonstrates his knowledge of the problems faced by the British steel industry. It is a pity the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not acknowledge those problems when he came up with that policy.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Energy
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman needs to demonstrate to his constituents that he is fighting for their jobs now. He needs to be putting pressure on his own Front Bench to have a proper strategy. This is a heavy industry, which is, by definition, energy intensive. The problem is that the Government do not have a strategy and are living hand to mouth trying to deal with a crisis they should have seen coming.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Transportation
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend agree that there is no strategy across the country? For example, Govia Thameslink is about to have new trains built for 2018, for the Hornsey depot in my constituency, yet there seems to be no attempt to get it to purchase steel from our own steelmakers.
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2015-10-28
Topic: Macroeconomics
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend comes up with yet another example of the lack at the heart of this Government. They do not seem to believe we should have an industrial strategy. Therefore, as these contracts come up, they seem to be living from hand to mouth without actually having a coherent and proper strategic approach to use the power of government procurement to try to preserve UK jobs.