argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-06-12
Topic: Government Operations
Patricia Gibson (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Given that it was open to the Government to protect time properly to debate and vote on matters of importance to the devolved Governments, do you agree that what has happened today shows the utter contempt that the Government have for the democratically elected will of the Scottish Parliament, given the power grab that will now ensue?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-06-12
Topic: Government Operations
Stephen Patrick Gethins (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is 20 years since this place passed the Scotland Act 1998, which means that we have had less than one minute of debate per year to make the greatest changes to that Act since it was passed. The Secretary of State for Scotland, who is in the Chamber, made a commitment to bring changes to clause 11 to the House of Commons. Will he make a statement on whether 19 minutes of debate were adequate, and do you think that there are ways in which we can make the Secretary of State more accountable? How do you think that this compares with democracy in other European institutions?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2018-06-12
Topic: Government Operations
Martin John Docherty-Hughes (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. First, may I congratulate you on staying in the Chair? It seems that we both studied comparative politics at the University of Essex. Perhaps I have as selective a memory as you about it Mr Speaker, can you set me straight about the constitutional position of this House and its relationship with the Parliament of Scotland and the historical narrative we are seeing played out here today in relation to the other place? There are Members of that other place, such as the archbishops and bishops of the Church of England, who are unelected and unrelated to the national Church of Scotland—we have no episcopacy in the governance of Scotland—who it seems have had greater time and ability to consider this, whereas the Parliament of Scotland’s will not to give a consent motion has been rejected and the majority of Scotland’s constitutionally elected constituency MPs have been unable to engage. I am sure that you will agree that that is the constitutional position of this House, and I must say that for Scotland it reflects very badly.
Tuition Fees: Social Mobility — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Education
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): A recent study by Universities UK and the CBI showed that about 60% of respondents were put off applying for part-time study courses because of the cost of tuition fees. Does the Minister have any plans to reduce tuition fee costs, or, even better, will he follow the example of the Scottish Government in scrapping them altogether?
Higher Education: Overseas Collaboration — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Education
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on the effect of immigration law on the ability of higher education establishments to engage effectively in work with their counterparts overseas.
Martyn Day (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Large-scale collaborative research projects take up to about two years to plan, so universities already need to be thinking beyond 2020. What assurance can the Minister give them today about funding levels after this date, and where will such funding come from?
Higher Education: Overseas Collaboration — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on the effect of immigration law on the ability of higher education establishments to engage effectively in work with their counterparts overseas.
Carol Frances Monaghan (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): But the Glasgow conference is not unique. In Liverpool last month, 10 delegates were refused entry, including one from India whose research has been sponsored by the UK Government. Professor McKee from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has said: "Academic collaboration is yet another consequence of the government’s ‘hostile environment’ policy, denying visas to those working on the ground to improve the health of some of the poorest people in the world" How will the Minister ensure that the UK continues to be open for international collaborations and conferences?
Stop and Search — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Law and Crime
Joanna Catherine Cherry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): As in England at present, the police in Scotland can stop and search only when they have reasonable grounds to do so. Violent crime in Scotland is down 44% since 2007-08, and offensive weapons offences have been reduced by almost two thirds. However, my colleagues in the Scottish Government accept that there is no room for complacency. In Scotland, treating knife crime as a public health issue is widely recognised as having been highly effective. Can the Minister confirm that his Department is looking carefully at the lessons to be learned from Scotland? Can he also tell us when the Offensive Weapons Bill will come back to the Floor of the House?
Nuclear Power: Toshiba — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from the development of a nuclear power plant at Moorside in Cumbria.
Andrew Egan Henderson Hendry (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Secretary of State should indeed have come to the House with a statement on this matter, because it demonstrates clearly that nuclear plants are not economically viable. Will this failure finally lead the UK Government to realise that they must scrap plans to set up new plants for the declining, dangerous nuclear sector? Will the Secretary of State now commit to ruling out increased subsidies to other nuclear developments? With the inevitable impact on the UK’s ability to meet its carbon reduction targets, does the Secretary of State regret his Government’s decision three years ago to cut investment in green technologies vastly, for ideological reasons, including the infamous betrayal of the £1 billion Peterhead carbon capture and storage project? The latest failure of nuclear is yet more evidence that renewables, growing cheaper and more reliable, are the future of low-carbon energy. Will the Secretary of State now finally properly commit to investing in renewables, including carbon capture and storage, to avoid falling even further behind the rest of the world?
Nuclear Power: Toshiba — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on Toshiba’s decision to withdraw from the development of a nuclear power plant at Moorside in Cumbria.
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Despite losing £100 million on this venture, Toshiba’s share price went up when it pulled out, yet the Secretary of State stands there and tells us that nobody is more committed to nuclear than he is. It is quite obvious that renewables are the future, yet this Government are blocking onshore wind development in Scotland. They are looking at pulling the export tariff, and as my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (Drew Hendry) said, they have already pulled CCS funding. When will they provide proper investment in renewables and end this nuclear obsession?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Stewart Hosie (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I want to ask the Minister a technical question. Given that the digital companies’ turnover and, indeed, profits are substantial, why have the Government been so modest in seeking to achieve only a £400 million tax take from those companies?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Melvyn Linden (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The Minister’s colleagues in the Scottish Parliament stand up week in and week out to ask for more money for public services, so if the Conservatives will not put up tax, where does the money come from or do they cut services?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I should say that I am not from the Labour party. The Government’s reasoning for the delay is what concerns me, especially when it is completely the opposite of the reasoning they are using about Brexit, where they are saying, "It’s fine. Everybody has heaps of time to prepare—loads of time." I thank the Government for the changes to transferable tax history. They have worked very well with the industry to ensure that late-life oil and gas assets can be exploited for longer. I first raised this issue in March 2016, so I am very glad that the Government are now moving on it. However, this is not the whole picture. It is appreciated that this change has been made, as it will have a small but positive effect. I am pleased that this measure has come through, but we still have not seen the oil and gas sector deal, nor have we seen proper unequivocal support for carbon capture and storage. I want the Government to make louder noises about carbon capture and storage, and they need to after pulling the rug from under the feet of the industry three years ago. They need to be even louder and more vociferous in their support because the industry has been stung. The companies that were keen to take part in carbon capture and storage have been stung by the decisions of the previous Chancellor, so the Government need to be as clear as possible about support for carbon capture, utilisation and storage, which is a real industry for the future.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Energy
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend correctly said that we have not seen an oil and gas sector deal. Is that not disgraceful considering that the Red Book shows that, over the lifetime of this Parliament, the industry is going to bring in an extra £6 billion of tax revenue. Instead, the Chancellor stood up and bragged that he is holding the tax at the current level for the oil and gas industry, instead of actually working to get an oil and gas sector deal?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The sooner that deal can be announced and that commitment can be made by the UK Government, the better for the industry. Confidence is still shoogly just now, and although that confidence is rebuilding, we need clear commitments for the industry and the clear support of the UK Government so that the industry feels more secure and takes decisions on investment and exploration. That is why signing a sector deal as soon as possible would be hugely appreciated. More generally, one of the things that infuriates and frustrates me about this UK Government particularly is that they think that if they stand up and invent a new definition for something, it will immediately become true. They have decided that if they say "living wage" instead of "minimum wage", people will actually be able to live on it. That is not how it works. People still cannot live on it, even if the Government call it a living wage, and that is especially the case for the under-25s, who are not eligible for the living wage. It does not cost someone who is 24 less to live than someone who is 25. The Government need to get rid of those differential rates The UK Government say that they have ended austerity. By anyone else’s definition, they have not ended austerity. Just because they say, "We’ve ended austerity," it does not mean that they have actually ended austerity. There are still cuts to Government Departments. There is still the benefits freeze. We still have all those issues.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am not taking any more interventions The OBR has made economic growth forecasts on the basis of a smooth and orderly Brexit. It has not made economic growth forecasts on the basis of us crashing out in a no-deal scenario, so its forecasts are only worth anything if the Government can strike a deal, as the Chancellor knows, which is why he has spoken about another fiscal event coming Frictionless trade is not frictionless just because the Government call it frictionless. If a good has to be stopped at the border, if somebody has to fill in an additional form or if there is any delay, that is not frictionless trade. Just because the Government say, "This is frictionless trade," it does not mean that it is actually frictionless trade The Government need to improve their processes around the Finance Bill. This year has been the worst in terms of those processes, and they have to improve. The Government could do that by ensuring that we take evidence at the Public Bill Committee The Government have to actually do the things they say they are doing. If they say they are going to give Scotland the Barnett consequentials for health, they should give it the Barnett consequentials for health. If they say they are ending austerity, they should end austerity. If they say they are putting in place a living wage, they should put in place a living wage Lastly, if the Government are talking about tax cuts, they need to look at the situation in Scotland. The figures I have from the Library say that around half of taxpayers in England pay more than they would if they lived in Scotland, and that half of taxpayers are the people who earn the least, not the most. The UK Government should look at what the Scottish Government are doing and learn some lessons.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman believes that universal credit is fully funded, but has he seen the evidence from DWP staff who are saying that they are spending so much time answering telephone calls that they cannot go through and answer the online journals from claimants? Does he not think that there is a problem there?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Is the hon. Gentleman seriously suggesting that people in Scotland should register themselves in England in order to pay less tax? With all due respect to him, I would have to say that many of us would view that as tax avoidance. [Interruption.]
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Patrick John Grady (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I am sorry the hon. Gentleman is having to get used to speaking from the Back Benches again, after his tremendous turn from the Front Bench in the UK Youth Parliament, but I am sure that, if he keeps up this line of complimenting the Government, it will not be long before he is back there. Does he not accept that the reality of the progressive tax reforms agreed by the Scottish Parliament as a whole—not just by the SNP Government—is that most people in Scotland are actually paying slightly less tax than they were this time last year? [Interruption.]
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Agriculture
Kirsty Ann Blackman (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If we do get this wonderful Aberdeenshire produce—it is the best in the world, I would suggest—on to lorries and they drive down to Dover but are then not able to cross the channel, what does the hon. Gentleman expect will happen to the Peterhead haddock?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I have just given some examples of how broken the UK social security system is. If the hon. Gentleman seriously believes that any devolved Government could address the mess of the social security system in the UK within weeks, he is kidding himself on.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend is quite right. Conservative Members try to divide people on the basis that Conservatives are for aspiration and the rest of us are not. According to the Conservative party, there are the undeserving and the deserving poor. No one deserves to be poor in this country, and that should always be the case.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the hon. Lady for that, because the point is well made. I was at the Westminster Hall debate she secured, and she gave an excellent speech on why we need split payments in universal credit. The reality is that the Scottish Government want to do split payments, but the Department for Work and Pensions is trying its best not to. That is despite the Work and Pensions Committee, of which I am a member, telling it that it should engage positively with the Scottish Government. The Department should perhaps use what is happening in Scotland as a pilot, which it could then roll out across the UK. Where individuals are subjected to domestic abuse and go through the universal credit system without split payments, the hon. Lady and I have a very real fear that that domestic abuse will become worse.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Labor
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Not at the moment We have heard warm words about rising wages from those on the Government Benches, but there has been no mention whatever of the fact that 4 million people are in insecure work. There has been complete silence about the Taylor review and what measures the Government will introduce as a result. The reality is that low pay and poorer living standards are on the rise As I said, there are 400 people dealing with telephone calls in the Department for Work and Pensions, but 4,504 chasing DWP social security fraud. There are also 400 people employed across the UK by the national minimum wage compliance unit. How are we going to chase these rogue employers if there are only 400 staff chasing up compliance with the minimum wage That brings us nicely to the issue of public sector pay and whether there is a public sector pay cap. Earlier, I made an intervention on the Minister. I did not really get an answer, and I do not think that anyone who has raised this issue in the last few weeks has got an answer. The reality is that the public sector pay cap is still in place across UK Government Departments. Why is it still in place? Under freedom of information, we now know that the departmental permanent secretaries got together in February this year and agreed the joint position across all UK Government Departments that there would be a pay rise of 1% to 1.5% for public sector workers. I find that extraordinary, because there are 200 separate pay negotiations across UK Government Departments, so how about a bit of efficiency and small Government from those on the Conservative Benches? Let us reduce the number of pay negotiations from 200. If the departmental permanent secretaries can agree one negotiation, there can surely be one negotiation with the trade unions Those on the Scottish Conservative Benches have made a number of, shall we say, interesting observations today. I was interested in the elaborate tax avoidance scheme suggested by the hon. Member for Gordon (Colin Clark): if someone is a higher rate taxpayer in Scotland, they should consider registering themselves somewhere else in the United Kingdom. That is tax avoidance by any description.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Government Operations
Christopher Charles Stephens (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Hon. Members can read Hansard tomorrow and come to their own conclusions Scottish Conservatives were complaining earlier about office closures. I find that fascinating from a political party that has put a meat cleaver to the jobcentre network and a meat cleaver to HMRC offices across the UK. You really could not make it up.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Angus Brendan MacNeil (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend makes an absolutely fascinating point about the Conservatives calling for the richest to relocate to avoid tax. Continuing that logic, they should say that those earning less than £33,000 in England should register in Scotland. We know that the many get the deal in Scotland, but they speak for the few, as ever.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Alison Emily Thewliss (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): My hon. Friend’s constituents, like mine, visit Shettleston job centre. Does it concern him as much as it concerns me that someone making a claim there on the first day universal credit rolls out—5 December—will not be entitled to any money until 9 January?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): If cutting taxes always brings in more revenue, how come every measure in the Red Book on cutting tax shows that it will cost the taxpayer money? Either the Treasury does not know what it is doing in its predictions, or it is putting cause and effect together wrongly.
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Alison Emily Thewliss (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman says that it is no longer a wicked system, but it is a wicked system for those who have more than two children. Why does he think it is justifiable to take so much money out of the mouths of kids in his constituency?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Social Welfare
Alison Emily Thewliss (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this benefit will apply to all children, regardless of when they were born, and could not reasonably have been planned for from next year? Is he also further aware that the social security system is supposed to be a safety net for us all and not meant to punish people for the circumstances they are in?
Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-12
Topic: Macroeconomics
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for giving way. If reducing corporation tax brings in more money, why has the Red Book never shown that, and why is the Treasury not able to provide any modelling that shows an increase in revenues from that reduction?
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure — House of Commons, 2018-10-11
Topic: Transportation
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): Carbon emissions in Scotland have been halved since 1990, but the next part of the low-carbon transition is the electrification of Scotland’s roads. The Scottish National party Government have committed to 1,500 new charge points. Does the Secretary of State agree that Scotland needs to get its fair share of the £400 million charge fund, based on our rural nature and unique geography?
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure — House of Commons, 2018-10-11
Topic: Technology
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): That answer is completely inadequate. We should not be getting such funding based on Barnett. Scotland has two thirds of the land mass of England but got only a fifth of the broadband funding. Will the Secretary of State make sure this iniquitous position does not happen in respect of the £400 million charging fund?