argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Pilgrim Fathers (400th Anniversary) — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I am not quite sure that that fits in with the Pilgrim Fathers on the 400th anniversary, and I think you need to sit down. We must be careful not to extend this debate beyond where the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) wishes to take it, and I am sure that he will not be tempted that easily.
Pilgrim Fathers (400th Anniversary) — House of Commons, 2016-03-09
Topic: Public Lands
John Mann (Labour, Centre-left): Before the Minister finishes his speech, I cordially invite him to Bassetlaw. I offer a personal guided tour of the site. He will have the opportunity to stay in the historic Sherwood forest. Of course, the majority of the Sherwood forest that still exists is in Bassetlaw. That is surely an offer that no tourism Minister could ever refuse.
European Union — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: Between 2007 and 2013, more than 8,000 businesses in the north-west were able to start up, thanks to EU funding. I welcome the Chancellor’s comments this morning about the analysis that he will put forward before 23 June. Will that include specific detail about the impact of leaving the EU on the economy of the north-west?
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Would there not be a double whammy if Britain left the EU? First, there is the widely predicted risk of depreciation, which will lead to higher interest rates. Secondly, any notion that our exporters would benefit from a cheaper pound is more than offset by the additional tariff barriers that those firms would encounter worldwide.
First-time Homebuyers — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Housing
Margaret Olivia Hillier (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor makes great claim for his policy, but in inner-London in my constituency, housing is a real crisis. This morning I met the head of our clinical commissioning group. We have a crisis in GP recruitment and in hospital doctor appointments. Even highly paid doctors cannot afford to get on the housing ladder in my constituency, and that is causing a crisis in public services. What will he do about that?
First-time Homebuyers — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Housing
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): There you have it, Mr Speaker. We know from the English housing survey that 201,000 fewer households owned a home in 2015 than five years ago, compared with an increase of 1 million under Labour. By 2025, nine out of 10 Britons under 35 on modest incomes will not be able to afford a home. Rents in the private sector are soaring, and the housing benefit bill is likely to be £350 million more than the Chancellor forecast last year. Is his record on housing investment one of failure, with British families now literally paying the price?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Questions: The Government are making some of the biggest investments in road and rail in our nation’s history. Is my right hon. Friend aware of any alternative investment policies, and of the impact that they would have on our nation’s economic security and, in particular, the southern powerhouse?; The OECD has estimated that tax havens are costing developing countries three times the global aid budget. Does the Chancellor share my frustration over the fact that the UK overseas territories have ignored the pleas of the Prime Minister, and have not introduced beneficial ownership registers? What more can be done to end the secrecy and inaction?; Tackling the deficit should rightly be a priority for the country. What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to ensure that everyone pays a fair share in meeting that objective?; Figures from the Public and Commercial Services Union show that 2,000 HMRC staff in Scotland face redundancy, including 150 experienced and dedicated people in Inverness. At the same time, the HMRC overtime bill is about £6 million a month. Can the Chancellor explain to my constituents how that makes any sense at all?; Will the Chancellor tell us when he is due to publish the proposals for the distribution and calculation of the apprenticeship levy to the devolved nations, and whether the Governments in those nations have agreed to it?; Following reports that Hinkley Point C faces further delays, will the Chancellor revisit his decision effectively to write the French an extremely generous long-dated option and instead bring forward fall-back options?; The Chancellor’s statement on ECOFIN referred to the UK seeking a multilateral agreement on making the details of the tax paid by companies publicly available on a country by country basis. Will he tell us what measures he will take to achieve that, and on what timetable? As a first step, will he admit that his Google tax deal was not a great success, and does he accept the Public Accounts Committee’s call for full transparency?; When services that have been removed from local authority control and centralised in England have been granted the right to reclaim VAT, does the Chancellor accept that the refusal to grant that right to Police Scotland—making it the only UK force to pay VAT—just looks vindictive? Will he not reconsider that decision?; If the Chancellor believes that a strong steel sector is fundamental to a strong northern powerhouse, what steps is he taking to level the playing field for the steel industry, the foundation of our manufacturing and defence industries, so that it can have a prosperous future to match its prosperous past?
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor chose to give a puff to his desire for Sunday trading liberalisation, but is he aware of the study produced yesterday which showed that all there will be is a switch of activity from small shops to big shops, and that that will mean a loss of thousands of jobs? [Interruption.]
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Civil Rights
Tom Watson (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Happy St David’s day. Yesterday, in a majestic performance at the Dispatch Box, the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General confirmed to the House that Cabinet Ministers who oppose the European Union and support a no vote in the referendum can get access to Government documents on the EU referendum if they use the Freedom of Information Act. Today, we read on the front page of the Daily Mail that the Paymaster General is going to scrap the commission looking at the Freedom of Information Act. Mr Speaker, have you had notice from the Paymaster General that he is seeking to make a statement to the House to explain the very unusual behaviour of the Government in shelving their own commission?
The FCO and the Spending Review 2015 — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): As the hon. Gentleman knows—he has been here a very long time—there are Treasury questions, Budget day, parliamentary questions, letters to Ministers, Adjournment debates and so on. There are any number of avenues by which these matters can be debated. Today, we are debating Foreign and Commonwealth Office expenditure on this particular estimates day With that, I think that is enough. If the hon. Member for Perth and North Perthshire wants me to rule him out of order I can do so, but if he can just stick to the FCO expenditure and bring his points in under that he will remain in order.
The FCO and the Spending Review 2015 — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I hope that was in order, because I have no idea what the right hon. Gentleman just said. If he would translate it for the benefit of those of us who do not speak Russian, I would be very grateful.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. We are used to the breathtaking arrogance of the SNP in this place, but it is completely wrong if an hon. Member raises a point that is clearly wrong and does not allow other hon. Members to question it.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): As you well know from the numerous—[Interruption.] I will deal with it, Mr Arkless. It will be easier if I do. As you well know, Mr Jones, that is not a point of order. If we were to rely on something that we believed not to be correct, we would never—[Interruption.] We would never, ever get through a debate. You and other Members in this House will continue to have different views. We will not always agree. On this occasion, it is not a point of order for the Chair.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Do not bring the Chair into the argument because the Chair will not rule on the debate. I am here to chair the debate, not to make a decision on who is right and who is wrong. I will let you continue with your speech.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Mr Jones, it will be easier if I can hear what is being said. I was hoping that you would speak next. We do not want to spoil that, because I want to hear from you.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order. The hon. Lady craved my indulgence, which I have been very good and given. She answered her own question, which is that the Procedure Committee, rather than today’s debate, is the right vehicle in which to take up this issue. I have allowed some indulgence, which I think was only fair, but we must move back to the core of the debate.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend makes a very good point. That was exactly what was designed in the formula. The Government were found out by the PCC for Devon and Cornwall. I accept what my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Steve McCabe) said about the Minister, but he is just a small cog in the huge machine. The machine is about devolving blame but not resources to local authorities. They devolve the blame to local decision makers and point the finger at them when cuts have to be made. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is the real villain of the piece, can stand back and say, "Not me, guv!" Since 2010, £2.2 billion—22% of the funding—has been taken out of police budgets in this country. I do not accept that an average constituent of mine understands how police funding is arrived at. It is unique in the sense that two-thirds of it—the bulk of it—comes from central Government. Many people feel that what they pay, for example in local rates, pays for local services. We know that that is not the case The system is very uneven. Some authorities are able to raise more in local precept than others. Areas such as mine are unable to raise a large amount. In Durham, 55% of properties are band A, so a 2% increase in the budget would raise nothing like the amount that could be raised in Surrey or in other parts of the country. That leads me to one of the issues highlighted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the autumn statement: the ability to argue that some of the lower precept local authorities can now not be bound by the 2% limit but by a £5 increase Again, all that does is help the wealthier areas. If we were allowed to do that in Durham, it would raise hardly anything compared with some of the more well-off forces such as Essex, Herefordshire and others. Again, that needs to be looked at.
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Keith Anthony Vaz (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has given us a pathway and timetable that we did not have before. Is he saying that as soon as the capabilities report comes to him, he will consider it and then start the funding review? Is that the timetable he is now setting in place?
Police Funding Formula — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Other
Gareth Thomas (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister will remember from the opening remarks of my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester East (Keith Vaz) that there has been speculation that the review will be put off until 2019. I appreciate that the Minister cannot give a timetable, but can he categorically rule out it starting as late as that?
Bombardier: Job Losses (East Belfast) — House of Commons, 2016-03-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman talks about being parochial, but of course with the launch of the C Series by Bombardier, the factory has a huge contribution to make to the UK aerospace sector as a whole. I understand his concern for his own constituency and region, but does he recognise that this is a national problem, as well as a local one?
Steel Industry — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Nia Rhiannon Griffith (Labour, Centre-left): As the Secretary of State well knows, at sites across Wales, such as Shotton, Llanwern, Orb, Trostre and Port Talbot, Tata steelworkers produce a whole range of specialist products. What assurances has he obtained from Tata that it will not siphon off the production of the most profitable lines to their plants aboard? What guarantees has he received that the intellectual property will remain with the Welsh operations in order to attract a suitable buyer and safeguard thousands of Welsh jobs?
Steel Industry: Government Support — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State will know that retaining the order book and customer base is critical for the Welsh steel industry. I want a short answer to a short question. Will the Secretary of State confirm whether he has had conversations with customers such as Honda, Nissan and Jaguar Land Rover to secure the integrity of the customer base? Yes or no.
Steel Industry: Government Support — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Mark Richard Tami (Labour, Centre-left): Yesterday, the Business Secretary said we need to work together, cross-party, on this, and the Secretary of State for Wales has just said the same. I understand that he is to visit Shotton on Monday—when was he intending to tell me?
EU Membership: Economy — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Nicholas Dakin (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for that answer. He is absolutely right; the Welsh economy depends on EU funding to a large extent. Does he agree that remaining in the EU is vital for training and employment opportunities in Wales and across the UK?
Disabled People: Employment — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Deborah Angela Elspeth Marie Abrahams (Labour, Centre-left): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Disability rights organisations, the Equality and Human Rights Commission and many others have decried the lack of evidence in support of the Government’s cutting £1,500 a year from disabled people who have been found not fit for work. How many employers in Wales have the Government signed up as active Disability Confident employers for those disabled people who are fit for work?
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): That certainly will happen in future Even if they were not criminals, many of Mossack Fonseca’s clients, if not all, had the strong intention of evading or avoiding the taxes that would otherwise have been due from them.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Housing
Catherine Elizabeth West (Labour, Centre-left): I thank my hon. Friend for his excellent speech and for bringing this debate to the House. Does he agree that this is a real issue for people in London, particularly in respect of the impact that these shady characters have on our London property market? It is a tragedy that Londoners, who want to remain in London, have to move out because these criminal elements are messing up the international finance system.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Housing
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): That confirms the need for open and public disclosure of beneficiary ownership and beneficiary interests. As my hon. Friend and every London MP knows, speculation on property in this capital city denies many of our constituents a decent roof over their heads.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): Let me press on a little, and I shall give way shortly Mossack Fonseca exploited the presence of loopholes and entire jurisdictions that favour secrecy and minimal taxation. We can expect further news over the next few weeks and months, as the investigative work continues. Yesterday the Panama headquarters of Mossack Fonseca was raided, but 10 days on since the initial leak, I believe that its UK offices in Hitchin—not far away—have not been, despite the raising of concerns by the firm’s founder about the lack of due diligence performed by the UK office in relation to a company in its charge, and a clear legal precedent for the UK authorities to intervene There may be more revelations to come, set to tarnish individual reputations. I put this mildly: the Prime Minister has done himself no favours over the last 10 days. A lesson for the future is that, when asked a straight question, one should answer straightforwardly and straight away. The Prime Minister could and should have come clean about his relationship with Blairmore Holdings far earlier.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Other
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I gave way earlier to the hon. Gentleman. I will press on because I know that others want to speak and I am sure he will want to speak himself. This is a world that the super-rich inhabit. They live by different rules and it is an alien world for the majority of the rest of us.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Housing
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): The important thing now, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr Skinner) has said, is that we build more homes to house those people. That will be an effective way of reducing prices, too. That will give access to home ownership to thousands more in the capital.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
David Anderson (Labour, Centre-left): In the interests of the people listening to this debate, will the Minister provide, either today or by putting something in the Library, details of companies or schemes identified since 2012 that could be classed as either morally repugnant or morally wrong, terms that were used by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor in 2012 to describe such schemes? Has any work been done on that? Can we get a register so that we know who to look out for in future?
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Order. Before I call the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne North (Catherine McKinnell), I should say that 11 Members wish to speak and I want to start the wind-ups at about 3.30 pm. If speakers take about eight minutes or less, everybody will get in.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Domestic Commerce
James Dolan Cunningham (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend mentioned earlier the situation in America. None of the bankers in this country was held to account for the crash, but a number of those in America were. Does she agree that something should be done about that?
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Everybody has been speaking for just over 10 minutes, rather than eight minutes, which is the informal guide. We now need to keep to about seven minutes or less, if we want to get everybody in.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Other
Dawn Petula Butler (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend think the comments that have been made—for instance, the right hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Sir Alan Duncan) said, "If you are not wealthy, you are a low achiever"—have added to the public’s distrust of politicians in this place?
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Other
Natascha Engel (Labour, Centre-left): Order. I have been listening very carefully. The hon. Gentleman knows that he is not to criticise Members of the other House directly or personally. He has been quoting from reports up until now. If he would desist from directly criticising Members of the other House, I would be very grateful.
Tax Avoidance and Evasion — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Paul Phillip Flynn (Labour, Centre-left): These are not new matters, if I may say so. I have dealt with that matter now If the Government fail to act against their own Members, who are not trying to stop the abuses of tax havens but are actually lubricating them, how can we take them seriously? There is some agreement on this, and some pleasure in the House that this situation has happened, because it might expose the corruption that is so endemic and the huge sums disappearing into tax havens. Light has been shone on all that I believe that there is a political agenda behind those who have hacked into Mossack Fonseca’s site. We do not know what that agenda is, and it might well be very sinister, but I will repeat my earlier point: one of the curious things here is what is happening with other nations. China has $44 billion in the Cayman Islands and $49 billion in the British Virgin Islands. Those are huge sums of money, but they are only part of the revelations—part is still to come. The reverberations of this pivotal scandal will spread for decades I am curious about the Government’s reluctance to act against China in many other ways. We have already done a dreadful and financially disastrous deal over Hinkley Point, which might give us the most expensive electricity in the world, although the deal is now collapsing. The Government seem to want to ingratiate themselves with the Chinese Government. As a result, they are going soft on them in many ways. What is most damaging is that they are not taking sharp action against the undercutting of the steel industry that is affecting so many jobs here We have a strange relationship with the Cayman Islands. We provide them with great advantages, by providing their defence for them. The Government’s permissiveness must stop. We will look to the Government to take the tough line that they have promised at the anti-corruption conference. They have not taken it before, so let us see them do it there.
Schools White Paper — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): I inform the House that I have selected the amendment in the name of the Prime Minister. It may assist the House if I explain that, as this is not an allotted Opposition day—in other words, it is not one of the 20 Opposition days required under Standing Orders—the usual procedure governing the handling of amendments does not apply. After the Opposition spokesman has spoken and moved the Opposition motion, the Minister will be called to move the Government amendment. The debate will then take place on the question that the amendment be made. At the end of the debate, the question on the Government amendment will be put, followed by the question that the main motion, amended or not as may be the case, be agreed to.
Schools White Paper — House of Commons, 2016-04-13
Topic: Mixed Topics
Lucy Maria Powell (Labour, Centre-left): This may be a semantic argument, but does it not say in the White Paper that the Secretary of State is removing the requirement for parent governors? Is the Secretary of State removing the requirement—yes or no?