argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Engagements — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: With party loyalties being severely tested, is my right hon. Friend aware that, as the country and the world ponder whether Brexit means Brexit and whether we will make a success of it, Southend-on-Sea has been welcoming ambassadors from all over the world to work in partnership and on investment, looking at our pier and building a new marina? Will she consider bringing forward a meaningful vote, for which I believe there is a majority in the House, that Southend-on-Sea be declared a city?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): From a Government that rolled out austerity and has caused such poverty across the country, the Prime Minister really ought to think for a moment about what she has just said. The last Labour Government halved child poverty; brought in children’s centres and Sure Start; and reduced poverty across the whole country. She seems to be ignoring the true impact of universal credit. The Trussell Trust says that in areas where universal credit has been rolled out, food bank use has increased by more than 50%. This week, we also learned that another 400,000 pensioners are in poverty compared with 2010. So why is the Prime Minister pressing ahead with cuts to pension credit for couples where one person is of pension age and the other is not?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Questions: With party loyalties being severely tested, is my right hon. Friend aware that, as the country and the world ponder whether Brexit means Brexit and whether we will make a success of it, Southend-on-Sea has been welcoming ambassadors from all over the world to work in partnership and on investment, looking at our pier and building a new marina? Will she consider bringing forward a meaningful vote, for which I believe there is a majority in the House, that Southend-on-Sea be declared a city?
Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (Labour, Centre-left): The last Labour Government lifted 2 million pensioners out of poverty; this Government have put 400,000 more into poverty. Age UK, which I think knows a thing or two about this, says that this proposal by the Government is "a substantial stealth cut". This year, 15,000 pensioner households could be up to £7,000 a year worse off as a result of this stealth cut I am pleased that the Prime Minister mentioned the triple lock, because at the last general election the Government alarmed older people by pledging to scrap the triple lock and the means-tested winter fuel allowance. Will the Prime Minister give an unequivocal commitment that this is no longer Government policy and will not be in the next Tory manifesto?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Rosemary Elizabeth Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. May I crave your indulgence? With only sentencing left, I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and every single Member of this House for the kindness they have shown me over the last two difficult years. I would also like to thank Robbie Mullen and Hope not Hate, because without their actions I might not be here. I thank the parliamentary authorities, the Parliamentary Liaison and Investigation Team, Lancashire and Merseyside police, and my new family friends, the national and Lancashire counter-terrorism units. I thank them all for continuing to protect me Beyond thanking so many kind people, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a serious point. I was to be murdered to send a message to the state, and to send a message to this place. Members of this House are regularly abused and attacked. Our freedoms, our way of life, our democracy is under threat, and we must do our utmost to defend it. While the Home Secretary is in his place, perhaps I might ask him to consider the Diplock process for terrorist trials. [Applause.]
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Have you received any notice of a statement from the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, given the appalling news this morning that the Government of Brunei are intending to introduce the stoning to death of members of the LGBT community? Given our close links with that Government—not least our military and business links, and our links through the Commonwealth —do you not agree that such a statement would be very useful to the House?
Windrush Compensation Scheme — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The Home Office took six months to agree to the urgent hardship scheme, nine months to set out the policy for it and, within 12 months of the Windrush scandal, it had helped only two of the 48 people who had applied. I understand that the number is now up to nine even though there were serious, urgent cases in which help was needed. What will the Home Secretary do to ensure that we do not see the same delays with this compensation scheme, which will provide the welcome support that people need?
Windrush Compensation Scheme — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Helen Elizabeth Hayes (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Home Office fund independent legal advice for those Windrush citizens who may not be able to navigate the Home Office website system or who may feel entirely unable directly to approach a Department that has so comprehensively breached their trust?
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. The contention of the hon. Member for Stone (Sir William Cash) that the Bill could cost £36 billion is, of course, highly controversial. It could equally be argued that crashing out with no deal would cost as much, if not more. In that case, it seems to me that what has happened hitherto and the advice from the Clerks has been wholly proper.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time I start by welcoming some of the words of the Prime Minister from yesterday. She said as part of her announcement: "This is a difficult time for everyone. Passions are running high on all sides of the argument", and that debate and division is "putting Members of Parliament and everyone else under…pressure…and…doing damage to our politics." I think we all recognise the pressures that she is talking about and the efforts that Members on both sides of the House, and with all kinds of different views on Brexit, are making to do the right thing in the national interest, to do the right thing whatever their different views on Brexit, and to do the right thing for their constituents. I hope that the very respectful and thoughtful tone of the debate that we had on the programme motion will be continued in this debate as well We have put forward this cross-party Bill to avert no deal on 12 April. We have done so for fear of the damage that no deal would do to all our constituencies. We understand that the Cabinet Secretary and National Security Adviser to the Government, Sir Mark Sedwill, told the Cabinet yesterday that no deal would make our country "less safe". The Cabinet has a responsibility to listen to that advice and I am extremely glad that it did. We understand, too, that the Cabinet was warned that food prices would go up by 10% in the event of no deal. Again, I am glad that it listened to that advice because that would have a huge impact on overstretched families across the country.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is right that there is a tight timetable for the Bill. That is because there is a tight timetable for the House, facing the deadline of 12 April and the European Council meeting that will take place. I will be honest: I could never have imagined when we started these debates that we would be in a situation where, nine days from Brexit day, nobody knows what is going to happen. That is causing huge concern and anxiety for businesses, families and people across the country. I will come on in a minute to the damage that no deal would do to my constituency and many others. We have a responsibility to ensure that we can avert it.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I completely agree. In fact, I proposed a cross-party commission to oversee the negotiations immediately after the referendum and again after the general election, because I was fearful that we would end up in gridlock, and I thought that the task would be performed best in a way that would build consensus.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Foreign Trade
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I think the hon. Gentleman is talking about the assessments of the impact on confidence that were made immediately after the referendum. Those were very different from the assessments of the impact of, for instance, World Trade Organisation tariffs, which are very practical, because it is clear what the impact will be on numbers, or on border capacity if customs checks are necessary. Those practical measures have not yet come into being, and I hope that they will not, because frictionless trade is important to our constituencies.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): I am pleased to co-sponsor my right hon. Friend’s Bill. I am pleased that it has had cross-party sponsorship from all the Members who want to prevent no deal because they have been listening to the CBI, the TUC and all the voices in our constituencies. Whatever our views on where Brexit goes, we all believe that we must avoid that catastrophic no deal, and whatever the progress of the Bill tonight, the House has resolved to avoid that.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I am going to make some progress before giving way again because I have given way many times Therefore, I think we have a responsibility. I know that there are Members across this House and people across the country who say they would like to see no deal happen and to see it happen as soon as possible. I simply say that it will hit other people’s lives and it is not fair. For the sake of the Castleford police officer, the Airedale families, the Pontefract and Normanton manufacturers and the small businesses and cancer patients across the country that is why I think we have a responsibility to make sure we have a system in place to prevent no deal on 12 April, just nine days away.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): Let me say something about the Prime Minister’s process, and then I will give way again The Prime Minister has announced her intention to pursue an extension, but the reason for continuing with this Bill is that there is no clear process for how the decisions will be taken about the length of the extension and the context, and this Bill does the following. It provides some clarity about how those decisions about the length of the extension will be taken. It gives a role for this House in that process. It also ensures we do not just slip back into facing that no deal cliff edge almost by accident because of the nature of the difficult conversations and the complexity of what we are all facing. Crucially, it will demonstrate to the EU parliamentary support for what the Prime Minister is asking for, and to be fair to the EU, given the turbulence we have had in this House at every stage of this process, it is quite reasonable for it to ask whether the Prime Minister has the support of the House in the things she is asking for.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I think we should take seriously that assessment, and not just from Government Ministers but also from the CBI and the TUC, who have come together in a powerful way to say very strongly the damage that would be caused by us being simply left with no deal. Therefore many of us have been trying to make this process work and trying to come together, whether through proposals we have made through Select Committees for different Brexit policy options or the work we have done calling for consensus or putting forward indicative votes and options. A lot of work has been done but I hope we all share the view that we should avoid a no-deal Brexit.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): It sets out that: "On the day after the day on which this Act receives Royal Assent, the Prime Minister must move a motion in the House of Commons" It also provides for the Government to be mandated by what the House has voted for. This is a two-clause Bill and that is all it is; it is very simple. It requires the Prime Minister to put the motion to Parliament proposing an extension of article 50. It asks the Prime Minister to define in the motion the length of the extension. Parliament can debate the motion and can seek to amend it in the normal way, and the conclusion is binding on the Government. The Prime Minister has to take that to the EU. If the EU Council agrees, then that is resolved; if the EU Council proposes a different date, the Bill proposes for the Prime Minister to come back to the House with a new motion The Bill simply provides for a simple, practical and transparent process to underpin the Prime Minister’s plan. It ensures that the extension has the support of the House of Commons, but also that we keep the parliamentary safeguard in place. So whatever is agreed by any further talks or indicative processes, or by the Prime Minister’s approach, she herself has said nothing can be implemented by 12 April. She has recognised that she cannot implement anything in only nine days, which is why the extension is needed. This is a hugely important Bill.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. Gentleman is right. I have also heard that we can access criminal records using the European Criminal Records Information System—ECRIS—in a matter of days at the moment, but that that could take weeks as a result of leaving the EU. That evidence was given to the Select Committee.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker The Bill deliberately does not specify that, because it should be for the Prime Minister to make a proposal. She has to go into the EU Council and do the negotiating. She also has to lead the process around indicative votes, so I think it is right that she should put this forward and that the House will then decide.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I am conscious that those on the Front Benches need to speak, so I shall make my final point It is really important for people to come together, both as part of this process and in how we go forward, because the challenges that we face from the threat of no deal are very significant. Three years on from the referendum, the biggest problem for all of us is that so little has been done to heal the national Brexit divide or to bring people together. This is a major constitutional change, and, to be honest, if we do not make the effort to bring people together, whatever we conclude today, tomorrow or next week will not last because we will not have done the work to build consensus. We all know that there is no consensus on the best way forward at the moment—we hope we can reach it, but at the moment there is no agreement—but let us at least sustain our agreement on ruling out the worst way forward. I commend the Bill to the House.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper) and the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin) for their work on the Bill, and the way in which they introduced both the business motion and the Bill to the House. Labour supports the Bill because it is necessary to fulfil the wishes of the House, which has voted down the Prime Minister’s deal on three occasions and has also voted against leaving without a deal on three occasions.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I cannot, and that underlines the importance of this Bill, which provides for the further extension of article 50, which is now inevitable. The Bill offers a legislative framework through which the House can have an effective role in the process of determining that extension Clearly, the Bill sits in the new context of the Prime Minister’s statement late last night, in which she said that she was seeking talks with my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition. Those talks have now begun. We welcome what the hon. Member for Grantham and Stamford (Nick Boles) described as a "late conversion to compromise", although we regret the damage that has been done to the economy and the credibility of this House by the Prime Minister not compromising sooner. It is an approach that she should have adopted long ago The Prime Minister could have adopted this approach almost three years ago, after the referendum, when the country decided by a painfully narrow margin to leave the EU, but not to rupture our relations with our closest neighbours, key allies and most important trading partners. She could have done so after the election, when she went to the country saying that Parliament was obstructing her and seeking a mandate for a hard Brexit, but lost her majority and failed to get the mandate. She could also have done so on any of the three occasions when her deal was defeated by the House, but she chose not to. We have consistently called on the Prime Minister to reach out to the sensible majority in the House and to unite the country, recognising that the people of this country include both the 52% and the 48%. But better late than never We also welcome the way in which the Prime Minister distanced herself last night from those kamikaze colleagues who, as she said, "would like to leave with No Deal next week." The House has expressed its clear view on leaving without a deal, and this Bill provides the legislative lock to ensure that the will of our sovereign Parliament is not frustrated. It also provides for the flexibility to ensure that we can accommodate whatever comes from the discussions between our parties and across the House over the next few days We have set out clearly the framework on which we will be seeking the compromise that the Prime Minister talked about last night: a permanent and comprehensive customs union; close alignment with the single market; dynamic alignment on rights and protections; clear commitments on participation in EU agencies and funding programmes; and unambiguous agreements on future security arrangements. We have also been clear in our support for a confirmatory public vote on any deal that comes about at this very late stage. We look forward to the further discussions on these issues, and we are pleased to give our full backing to this Bill.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: Government Operations
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Just to help the House, on my sheet of paper, which we are working to, amendment 13 is in the name of Yvette Cooper With amendment 13 it will be convenient to consider: Amendment 20, page 1, line 11, at end add ", and that date shall be no later than 30 June 2019." Amendment 21, page 1, line 21, leave out subsections (6) and (7) Amendment 22, page 2, line 3, at end insert— "() Nothing in this section prevents a Minister of the Crown from seeking, or agreeing to, an extension of the period specified in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union otherwise than in accordance with this section." This amendment ensures that the Bill does not limit the powers that a Minister of the Crown would otherwise have to seek, or agree to, an extension of the Article 50(3) period. Amendment 1, page 2, line 3, at end insert— "(8) But the Prime Minister may not agree to any extension of the Article 50 period proposed by the European Council which is later than 22 May 2019." Clause stand part Amendment 14, in clause 2, page 2, line 5, leave out "2018 Act" and insert "the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018" This clarifies the title of the previous Act being referred to. Amendment 6, page 2, line 7, leave out from "force" to end of line 7 and insert "subject to the approval of the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly of Wales, on such day as a Minister of the Crown may by regulations appoint." Clause 2 stand part New clause 4—Amendability of motions— ‘Any motion brought forward under section 1(1) in the form set out in section 1(2) may be amended in line with section 1(3) only to include a date.’ This new Clause would prevent further amendments to standing orders etc. New clause 5—Amendability of motions (No. 2)— ‘Any motion brought forward under section 1(1) in the form set out in section 1(2) may be amended in line with section 1(3) only to include a date no later than 22 May 2019.’ This new Clause would prevent further amendments to standing orders or business of the House of Commons etc and impose a maximum duration of the extension period. New clause 7—European Elections— ‘No extension of the period under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union may be agreed by the Prime Minister if as a result the United Kingdom would be required to prepare for or to hold elections to the European Parliament.’ New clause 13—Procedure for ensuring domestic legislation matches Article 50 extension— ‘In paragraph 14 of Schedule 7 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (regulations amending the definition of "exit day" to be subject to approval by each House of Parliament) for the words from "may" to "each" substitute "is subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either".’ This new clause changes the procedure for regulations, under section 20(4) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, altering the definition of "exit day" from affirmative to negative procedure.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): Sadly, this is the consequence of us being nine days away from Brexit day. That is not a situation that any of us wanted to be in—to have the clock run down this far—with no agreement in place. The Prime Minister did not put any withdrawal agreement to Parliament until January, and it has been put back several times since then, so we have not had a clear plan. That is the situation we are in.
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill — House of Commons, 2019-04-03
Topic: International Affairs
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): I do agree, and I would add that the intent and provisions of this Bill are extremely simple. We understand that, because of the timescale, the Government will ask us to make decisions on some very big things in the next couple of days before the European Council.