argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Parliamentary and Local Elections — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister may be interested to know that the turnout in my constituency of Glasgow North East at the last election was 53%, which was well below the national average. It also happens to be an area with some of the lowest incomes and highest unemployment in the country. Research has shown that low-income workers and long-term unemployed people report lower levels of political knowledge and participation in political activities than those from other occupational backgrounds. Given that they are also less likely to be on the electoral register—
Parliamentary and Local Elections — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Catherine Jane Smith (Labour, Centre-left): It is clear that disabled people are under-represented in our democracy and our politics, but in 2015, the Minister’s Government abolished the access to elected office fund, which supported many disabled people in meeting the extra costs in standing for office. How can the Government claim to be making democracy more accessible when these financial barriers are put in their place?
Voting Age — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Laura Smith (Labour, Centre-left): During a debate in 2015, the hon. Member for Norwich North (Chloe Smith), said: "I am one of those who believes that we should allow voting at 16".—[Official Report, 17 November 2015; Vol. 602, c. 572.] Since then, a range of senior Conservatives have outlined their support, including the former Chancellor, who said that the Conservative party risked "being on the wrong side of history" if it refused to back the measure. Does the Minister agree with his colleague and will does he support votes at 16?
Ethical Procurement — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): Another recent report has commented on the link between ultra-processed food and cancer, rising levels of obesity, and the fact that only one in four adults is eating five a day. What more can the Government do through their public procurement processes to encourage healthy, sustainable eating, and to source it from British producers?
Voter ID Pilots — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities participating in voter ID pilots at the local government elections in May 2018 communicate to voters changes in the voting process.; What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities participating in voter ID pilots at the local government elections in May 2018 communicate to voters changes in the voting process.
Nicholas Desmond John Smith (Labour, Centre-left): Research by the Royal National Institute of Blind People has found that the polling cards in the Government pilot are still inaccessible for blind and partially sighted people, and are often mistaken for junk mail. Can the Government guarantee that restrictive ID requirements will not disenfranchise disabled voters?
Voter ID Pilots — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities participating in voter ID pilots at the local government elections in May 2018 communicate to voters changes in the voting process.; What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities participating in voter ID pilots at the local government elections in May 2018 communicate to voters changes in the voting process.
Gareth Craig Snell (Labour, Centre-left): What guarantees can the Minister give people who do not currently have the necessary ID to go and vote in the upcoming elections that they will be able to have access to the photographic ID that is needed without incurring personal cost?
Voter ID Pilots — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities participating in voter ID pilots at the local government elections in May 2018 communicate to voters changes in the voting process.; What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities participating in voter ID pilots at the local government elections in May 2018 communicate to voters changes in the voting process.
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): In the context of these trials forcing people to show ID to vote, in the context of individual electoral registration resulting in 2 million people falling off the electoral register, and now it seems in the context of proposals to make postal votes harder to obtain, why is it that every change the Government bring in makes it harder for people to vote? Why are they scared of people voting?
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time New clause 9 stands in the name of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and other hon. Friends I thank the previous Minister for Women and Equalities, the right hon. Member for Putney (Justine Greening), for the equality impact assessment response sent to me just before Christmas. Her responses are normally quite upbeat. I found this response a little lacklustre, but it highlighted why we need to support new clause 9. Her letter highlights the weaknesses of "due regard" and goes on to make a somewhat puzzling statement: "All Departments carefully consider the equality impacts of individual policy decisions taken on by those sharing protected characteristics in line with our legal obligations and our clear commitment to equality issues." Therein lies the problem: this Government have not shown a clear commitment to equality issues-far from it. With 86% of the cuts falling on the shoulders of women, and with black, Asian and minority ethnic people and the disabled suffering more than any other group, I find it hard to understand why the Government try to proclaim that they are committed to equalities.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): I agree that it is good to get companies to publish their pay gap information, but there are no teeth if companies fail to do so. That is a real problem that needs to be addressed. We need to tackle the gender pay gap, and there needs to be punishment for companies that fail to address the pay gap—that is an unfortunate failing in the Government’s plan.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): I am sorry, but I am just coming to the end of my speech. If the Government fail to support this very reasonable new clause, more and more people will begin to question why this Government are so intent on harming and hindering women and those with protected characteristics, as opposed to helping them.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Lady has mentioned the power of numbers to be able to track progress. Obviously, new clause 9 is about the power of numbers to be able to track progress in tackling inequality. If she thinks that those numbers were so important in the battle to ensure that we did not leave young people behind, why does she not think the same when it comes to women and ethnic minorities?
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Lady is promoting the Government’s record. One reason why the Labour party wants to get explicit equality impact assessments—not the tax information and impact notes, which I think is what she has been told the Government do produce—is that the evidence is showing counter to what she suggests. For example, we know that the gender pay gap between women in their 20s and men in their 20s has actually started to grow under this Government. It is now five times what it was six years ago. I do not know where the hon. Gentleman from Scotland got his data. I got mine from the Office for National Statistics, if he wants to have a look. Can the hon. Lady account for that? Does she not understand that having the data—understanding where Government policy is either promoting or helping to deal with the situation—would help us all to make progress?
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Member for Cheltenham (Alex Chalk), as ever, needs clarification. There is data that shows us that the gender pay gap is growing. We are asking for analyses of the impact of Government policy so that we can understand it. We are talking about two different things. I hope that clarifies, for him and for the hon. Member for Redditch (Rachel Maclean), why the new clause matters.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): I want to clarify something. Equality impact assessment is part of the public sector equality duty. It looks at the implementation of policies, assesses them, and sees whether they have helped or hindered progress. That is all that equality impact assessment does. It is a good thing. It is not an extra burden; it makes for good decision making.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Other
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Member for Hitchin and Harpenden (Bim Afolami) is absolutely right: this new clause does highlight the difference between the Government and the Opposition. The Government are intent on taking actions, regardless of whether they help, hinder or hurt people, whereas Labour Members want to ensure that we have policies that help society.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Civil Rights
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): I just want to help the Minister a bit. The Women’s Budget Group, the Runnymede Trust and lots of other organisations, as well as the ONS and HMRC, accumulate the data that would be needed, so the data necessary to carry out equality impact assessments are available. In fact, the Treasury does some assessments anyway.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): Having a detailed understanding of how policy choices exacerbate or eliminate inequality at every stage of policy making is key to tackling burning injustices and producing good policies. I wish to put new clause 9 to the vote. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. Lady can come back later on. This is not a dialogue, as you would no doubt tell me, Madam Deputy Speaker We have a timid, feckless and self-obsessed Government who are frightened of their own shadow. They continue to give more money back to the banks, notwithstanding the fact that they keep telling us that the resources coming into the Government are insufficient to support our public services We are seeking three things by moving new clause 3. First, we want to require the Government to carry out a review of the bank levy, including of its effectiveness in relation to its stated aims. Secondly, we want to establish the extent of the effect of the 2015 cuts on revenues from the levy. Thirdly, we wish to calculate how much would have been raised if the Government had stuck with Labour’s bankers’ bonus tax. Such a report would put under the microscope for all to see the Government’s malpractice—that is what it amounts to—in cutting frontline services while offering tax giveaways to banks that can more than afford them. It would require the Minister to acknowledge that far more would have been raised under Labour’s bankroll tax and, just as importantly, that the Government’s current bank levy has done little to influence and mitigate the risky banking practices that remain in use in our financial services industry.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): The explanatory statement for new clause 3 says: "This new clause requires the Government to carry out a review of the bank levy, including its effectiveness in relation to its stated aims, the revenue effects of the changes made in 2015 and the comparable effectiveness of the bank payroll tax." The stated aim, as set out in the Government’s own document, is as follows: "Its purpose is to ensure that banks and building societies make a fair contribution, reflecting the risks they pose" We are asking for a review. If the hon. Gentleman is so sure of his facts and his case, why not have the review and see who is right in this debate?
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Other
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman cannot have it both ways. The Government introduced an arcane procedure, which was first used, I think, by Winston Churchill in 1929, effectively to stop us moving any substantive amendments. Does he not recognise that, whatever we wanted to do, we would not have been able to change things anyway, because the Government were not permitting us to do so?
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): When I have made statements and I have been wrong, I do not mind people bringing that to my attention, but I did not say that the banks were not making a fair contribution. We were talking about a fairer contribution in the context of the Government’s own definition of what they should be doing. That is the point. The hon. Lady should have a look at the work. She should have a look at the book. She should do her research, and then make an accusation.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jonathan Neil Reynolds (Labour, Centre-left): There must be an objective assessment, given the strength of the economic risk that we face from Brexit. In terms of financial services, Brexit could diminish market access; it could take it away and make a situation where there is not a legal right to do the kind of business that currently takes place within the United Kingdom. There is no comparison between that and differences of political opinion over policies, and the Government and Conservative Back Benchers must take the economic risks of Brexit seriously.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the Minister for that explanation, but as we have said before, when we take both those measures together, we see that the reduction in the levy along with the surcharge results in a lower overall contribution over time. We have spelled out clearly in our previous debates that the overall amount coming from the banks is receding over time, even with the surcharge.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): In practice, most of the commentary that I have seen from experts and those working in the housing sector suggests that in areas where there is extreme competition between different types of buyer—for example, first-time buyers, those buying additional properties, investors, and those moving to a second or third property—such a measure may help initially, but the overall cost increase will also affect first-time buyers. They will therefore be buying at a higher price, so most of the impact of the measure—as with previous stamp duty changes without a boost in supply—will help sellers, not buyers. That was the Conservative Government’s own assessment of the impact of their previous cut to stamp duty in the absence of additional measures to boost supply.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): I am aware of what Mr Johnson said, but I think he has fallen into the trap of looking only at the impact of the change on an individual buyer and forgetting that it will have an impact on the housing market, particularly in areas where there is strong supply and strong demand, and where such a change is likely to push up prices. I agree with Mr Johnson on many things, but in this case, unfortunately, the context has been missed, and it is important that we bear it in mind.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): I am sure the hon. Lady is well versed in the subject, but when it comes to the cost for first-time buyers, there has been an increase. That assertion is supported by the evidence, and that is exactly what we are concerned about. We need to take action. The Government often say they want to help first-time buyers, and I think it is important that we take them at their word. We should also look at what the OBR said in its assessment of the policy. Again, I go back to whether the Government received any advice about the likely impact of their policy. It is disappointing that we have not had any clarity on that matter.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): I am always delighted to hear from the right hon. Gentleman. It might be instructive for us to look at the shape of the market, and at which elements may be reducing in price and which may not. I have seen media coverage suggesting that any reduction seems to have been reversed recently. In any case, it appears that there might have been a price reduction in the highest-cost areas with the most expensive properties, but are those the properties that first-time buyers are likely to be considering unless they are incredibly well off? Some may well be, but most first-time buyers in this country are not looking to move into properties worth multiples of a million pounds. They are looking to move into properties that are much more affordable, so the lack of Government action to help them is enormously disturbing. That is why we do not support this measure; others would have been more effective. In particular, we do not support the measure in the absence of action to boost the supply of affordable housing I should mention that the Government’s definition of affordable housing enables a home worth £400,000 to be classified as affordable. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House would not appreciate that definition of affordability.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for mentioning that. For some time, Labour has proposed changes in this area, but they were dismissed as "Venezuelan-style socialism," which I think was the phrase that we heard from Government Members. We are concerned about this issue, but we are also concerned about matters in the planning system that the Government have not touched, such as the fact that the rules on viability put all the cards in the developers’ pockets. That means that, if someone wants to develop any social supply, there are pressures on the affordability of the rest of that development. We are very aware of that and have worked on it consistently. Sadly, we have not always been supported in that, but I am happy that the right hon. Gentleman has come on board with Labour policy, and that the Government have as well There is a general lack of measures and lack of action on other elements of the housing crisis, which is so problematic—the stamp duty change seems to be the only real, significant change in relation to housing policy. Sadly, all of us as Members are seeing the impact of the housing crisis in our postbag, in our surgeries and, very sadly, on many of our streets. Rough sleeping has more than doubled under the Conservatives. It is the No. 1 issue that is mentioned to me on the doorstep in my constituency. I am sure that is the case for many other urban MPs. Even those who do not see it in their constituency probably see it, sadly, when they come to work here. Of course, we had a terrible tragedy in that regard recently.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): I would accept that there have been changes from year to year in the overall level of home ownership, but the cumulative reduction in home ownership under Conservative Governments has been far more substantial. Across the piece, we saw that increase of 1 million—
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): No, I will not give way, because I think I have answered the point. As I say, it is very clear; the figures speak for themselves, very obviously, on this point. The point is particularly and disturbingly clear in relation to home ownership among under-45 households—so for younger people—where the number of homeowners has fallen by 1 million since 2010 We had a debate earlier about home ownership, and the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately) stated, "It’s not just about home ownership. We need to think about other areas as well". That is absolutely right. We have 1.3 million additional private renters in this country. Many on the Opposition Benches would not necessarily see that as a terrific thing; we would see it as lots of people stuck in private rented accommodation who do not want to be there, and we do not see measures in the Budget or Bill to deal with that problem.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Housing
Anneliese Jane Dodds (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do beg your pardon Let me end by quoting, very briefly, what I think was a devastating assessment of this policy by my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral South (Alison McGovern), because not every Member who is present now was present then. She said: "what is really unpopular in our country is having to step over rough sleepers while walking home. What is really unpopular in our country is having to watch other parents taking paper into schools because our schools cannot even afford the basic necessities. And what is deeply unpopular in our country is watching the number of food banks grow because jobs do not pay enough People will remember that while all that was going on, the Tories were busy cutting stamp duty for people who could afford to buy houses. I do not think they will ever forget that."—[Official Report, 18 December 2017; Vol. 633, c. 867.]
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Can I just try to be helpful? I want to get as many speakers in as possible, and I also need to hear from the Scottish National party spokesperson, so I ask Members to try to keep it short, as at least six more people want to speak.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Time is short, and Members should not be taking advantage. I want to get the leader of the hon. Lady’s party in, but I will not be able to if we have interventions that are speeches.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Sit, please. In fairness to the Minister, he has a very short time in which to speak. By all means make an intervention to get on the record, but please do not try to make a speech on an intervention.
Finance (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-02-21
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): I can now inform the House that I have completed certification of the Bill, as required by the Standing Order. I have confirmed the view expressed in the Speaker’s provisional certificate issued on 20 February. Copies of my final certificate will be made available in the Vote Office and on the parliamentary website Under Standing Order No. 83M, a consent motion is therefore required for the Bill to proceed. Copies of the motion are now available Does a Minister intend to move the consent motion?