argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Public Lands
Nicholas Soames (Conservative, Centre-right): This news will be warmly welcomed in Mid Sussex, where we have had some real trouble on this front. Are there any criteria in the Minister’s excellent proposal relating to what councils may put on their community asset lists to be protected?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Anne Marie Morris (Conservative, Centre-right): I am interested in the Minister’s comments. My concern is that where a council chooses not to determine that a pub or any other asset is a community asset, there is no right of appeal. That is a real issue. If the council has a particular interest, could there not be conflict?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Other
Peter James Luff (Conservative, Centre-right): Let me begin by drawing attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests I am encouraged by what the Minister is saying. I was attracted to new clause 16, but I think that his compromise —or alternative—proposals have their attractions as well. He said earlier that secondary legislation would be introduced at the earliest opportunity. Will that happen during this Parliament?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Andrew James Bridgen (Conservative, Centre-right): The Minister has told us that once a public house has been listed as an asset of community value, it will benefit from full planning protection. Will he explain exactly what "full planning protection" means in that context?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrew James Griffiths (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the Minister for this morning’s ministerial statement. Does he agree that, while his proposal will protect pubs that communities really care about, new clause 16, although well intended, could cause pubs that no longer had the support of their community and were no longer financially viable to be boarded up, perhaps vandalised, and to be local eyesores for many months as a result of pointless bureaucracy?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
James Morris (Conservative, Centre-right): The Minister has not mentioned a very real risk that has been raised with me. Sandwell council is currently considering an asset of community value application for the Haden Cross Inn in Cradley Heath, but it seems to believe that the application involves a significant compensation risk.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Brian Arthur Roland Binley (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my hon. Friend not realise that if a pub is boarded up and the issue goes to the local authority, the local authority will want to move pretty quickly to stop a building becoming derelict? That is not a problem, but does he also recognise that the owner of the building is often not the owner of the business that operates inside that building? Does he therefore share my concern that in certain cases pubcos in particular have sold out even though there was a need locally for the pub to exist?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. I hesitate to interrupt the Minister and I appreciate that he has taken a great many interventions because many Members wished to ask questions and make points, but he has also taken up a very large chunk of this fairly short debate and I am conscious that many Members wish to speak. I trust, therefore, that as he turns to what is only the third new clause in the group, he will not have to address all 16 amendments.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Rebecca Elizabeth Scott Harris (Conservative, Centre-right): I appreciate that the Minister is saying that two thirds of council decisions are upheld, but is he aware that sometimes the Planning Inspectorate is used as bogeyman or fairy-tale villain by large-unit developers or town planners, and the effect is, "Come on councillors, be good children, hurry up with your local plan, put in large sections of greenbelt development; otherwise the Planning Inspectorate will get you"? Wittingly or unwittingly, the Planning Inspectorate is being abused in this way.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Andrew Theakstone Percy (Conservative, Centre-right): What would the Minister say to people in Airmyn, in my constituency, who have just had a factory forced on them, against the emerging local plan? We know that councillors were put on the committee specifically to vote for that proposal. People are really angry. None of what the Minister has said will help those people, who want to appeal against this decision to build a factory on greenfield land in a village against the wishes of local people and local representatives.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. We have had a great many interventions in this debate. I appreciate that the shadow Minister has had only a moderately long time in which to speak and that she has a lot to say. However, I must now appeal to all Members: we have 21 minutes left and a great many matters to discuss, so they must all speak quickly. If everybody proceeds with no repetition, hesitation or deviation, everyone will get to speak.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Centre-right): I will be brief, to allow other Members to speak. We clearly need more time to debate major Bills such as this on Report. It does us no credit that we have insufficient time I rise to speak to new clauses 12 and 20. New clause 12 is supported by more than 20 of my right hon. and hon. Friends and would abolish the Planning Inspectorate, and new clause 20 would create a new community right of appeal against adverse planning decisions I believe that the Localism Act 2011 was one of this Government’s most important pieces of legislation. It gives communities power, and the provisions on community assets are one example of that. I welcome the Government’s proposals to strengthen those provisions so that pubs may be protected, which is a sensible way forward. I also welcome the development of neighbourhood plans, which, as the Minister said, are now proceeding well, with community support, including in my constituency. They give the local community the power to decide where developments should go However, that plan-led system can sometimes be a developer-led system, which is not what we want. Localism can be undermined, especially by decisions of the Planning Inspectorate. In a good report issued before Christmas, the Select Committee on Communities and Local Government said that it had received a great deal of evidence that the national planning policy framework "is not preventing unsustainable development in some places" and that "inappropriate housing is being imposed upon some communities as a result of speculative planning applications." Such speculative applications, put in against the wishes of communities drawing up neighbourhood plans, are particularly damaging. Developers know that they have an opportunity to get permission for sites that they would not get permission for were the neighbourhood plan to go through. Too often, the Planning Inspectorate either upholds on appeal a local authority’s decisions to decline those applications or terrifies the local authority into submission, so that it gives permission because it knows that otherwise it would lose an appeal and would have to spend a great deal of money on doing so.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Nicholas Soames (Conservative, Centre-right): I entirely agree with the thrust of my right hon. Friend’s argument. Does he agree that it is immensely discouraging to communities trying to make local plans when their wishes are ridden over roughshod by the Planning Inspectorate?
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Centre-right): I strongly agree with my right hon. Friend, who has been tireless in promoting the interests of local communities against such developments in his constituency. The first problem is the Planning Inspectorate upholding or encouraging speculative applications. The second is that the inspectorate is interfering with local plans drawn up by planning authorities. The Conservative party’s manifesto at the last election stated: "To give communities greater control over planning, we will…abolish the power of planning inspectors to rewrite local plans" That is exactly what we should now do, but the inspectorate is rewriting local plans. It is raising housing numbers in my constituency to beyond the level set out in the south-east plan, and it is causing delay at a time when responsible authorities are planning for a great number of houses—40,000 in the district council areas that cover my constituency, where there are 7,000 unbuilt planning permissions in one authority alone.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Centre-right): I very much welcome the Minister’s important intervention, and we look forward to that new guidance The Planning Inspectorate is meant to stand in the shoes of Ministers. I submit that Ministers could stand in their own shoes and take decisions themselves if they had to interfere. That would perhaps deal with at least some of the £40 million budget and 80 staff of the Planning Inspectorate.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Andrew John Bower Mitchell (Conservative, Centre-right): I rise to support two of the provisions tabled and ably espoused by my right hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert). The first is new clause 12, where he has put the case succinctly; after all, we made a manifesto commitment to abolish the Planning Inspectorate. I also want to draw the House’s attention to the fact that the inspectorate is not taking sufficient account of local feelings in the judgments it makes I particularly wish to draw the Minister’s attention to new clause 20, which, as my right hon. Friend has said, builds on our localism agenda. The limited right of appeal to the Secretary of State is extremely important and would be of great benefit to my constituents in Sutton Coldfield, where there is massive opposition to the proposition that we should build between 5,000 and 6,000 homes on its green belt. Yet that opposition, expressed in marches across the countryside as well as in public meetings, has been entirely ignored by the local authority In proposed new subsection (2B), my right hon. Friend points out the importance of "ward councillors for the area who have lodged a formal objection to the planning application in writing to the planning authority, or where there is more than one councillor, all councillors by unanimity" Giving that degree of local support to what the local community want is extremely important. I believe and hope that the Minister, perhaps on Third Reading, will be able to give my constituents some comfort on that The opportunity of genuine community involvement should be built in at every stage of planning the process; there should not just be the one-off chance that those responsible for development can choose either to respond or to ignore. Recently, when the inspector held an oral hearing at which I was able to give evidence on behalf of my constituents, he asked for more evidence to be adduced on the requirement for the colossal amount of building involved. We have always argued that there was not sufficient evidence to build on Sutton Coldfield’s green belt, particularly in respect of the inward immigration figures in the area. We draw some comfort from the decision by the Planning Inspectorate, but it is extremely important that the local community is able to have far more say than we do at that moment, at this important juncture in the life of the royal town of Sutton Coldfield.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Andrew James Griffiths (Conservative, Centre-right): I shall take a minute to tell hon. Members that we all need to see pubs protected and to see them thrive. What the Minister has done today is to say that if 21 people in a community want to protect their pub, they can do so and they can afford it protection under the planning laws. If a pub cannot get 21 people to support it, it is not financially viable. There is no need to have extra red tape and regulation as proposed in new clause 16. The Minister has, simply and succinctly, put the power back in the hands of pub goers, pub lovers and beer drinkers, and I commend him for doing so.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Other
John Henry Hayes (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman, with the courtesy he personifies, raised that with me before we came to the House today. I have committed to take another look at that through the parliamentary draftsman. There is no intention to disadvantage staff in that regard. I give that absolute assurance, but I will double-check the language, because language in such things matters. He and I are in discussion and I have committed to write to him as soon as possible, and certainly before the matter is discussed further, to clarify the use of the language to which he has drawn the House’s attention.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Other
John Henry Hayes (Conservative, Centre-right): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time This is a Bill for the long term. As I said on Second Reading, Governments of all persuasions neglect the long term. Perhaps that is only human—[Interruption.]
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Housing
Andrew John Bower Mitchell (Conservative, Centre-right): Before my right hon. Friend leaves the issue of planning, may I ask him about new clauses 12 and 20, tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert)? Obviously, there was no possibility for a Minister to respond to the points he and I made on those clauses, but if the Minister has a moment to say a word or two on them, I am sure my constituents in the royal town of Sutton Coldfield would be grateful.
Infrastructure Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Mixed Topics
John Henry Hayes (Conservative, Centre-right): I am delighted to amplify the remarks that I made in an earlier intervention and say that we do take very seriously the remarks made by my right hon. Friend and the amendments tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert). We will take the necessary steps to ensure that the spirit that underpinned those amendments is realised in respect of Government policy. I must say that my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield has been a doughty champion of the interests of the people in his constituency in this regard. He is right that development needs to enjoy community support, to be proportionate and, in my judgment, to inspire and to elevate. Is that too much to ask for in our age? I say that it is not The introduction of mayoral development orders will allow the Mayor of London to assist local authorities to regenerate London. Across the nation, these planning reforms will help kick-start a new era of construction that is fit for purpose Tonight, we have also debated energy. Some of the measures that we have introduced are designed to assist our current and future energy needs. We will take a lead in improving global transparency in the extractive sector by participating in the extractive industries transparency initiative. Our country has an enviable record on the regulation of extractive industries. We have listened carefully to concerns about new forms of extraction and have put in place additional measures to reassure Members across the House. The House will have seen tonight that, because we are sensitive to those concerns, because we are responsive to arguments, and because we listen and learn, we will take on board the perfectly proper considerations of those who are as determined as we are to ensure that these things are done safely and securely and in tune with local interests.
Traveller encampments in Brighton and Hove — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Mixed Topics
Simon Kirby (Conservative, Centre-right): Unauthorised Traveller encampments remain a major issue in my constituency and across the wider city area of Brighton and Hove. Many constituents feel that the city council does not have a robust plan in place to move on Travellers on unauthorised sites expeditiously, and that too often the needs and wishes of the existing settled community appear to be ignored. Many of my constituents believe that the city council, after years of trying to manage the issue, should be more actively using the powers available to it. The petition has been signed by thousands of local people, and a similar online petition attracted the support of 2,000 local people The petition states: The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to encourage Brighton and Hove City Council to use the powers available to them to deal promptly with unauthorised traveller encampments in the city And the Petitioners remain, etc Following is the full text of the petitions: The Petition of residents of Moulsecoomb, Woodingdean, Rottingdean & the wider Brighton area, Declares that Brighton and Hove City Council has powers to deal with unauthorised traveller encampments; further that the Petitioners believe that the views, concerns and needs of the existing, settled community on this issue too often seem to be ignored; and further notes that sensitive sites in the city seem to be repeatedly targeted every year, costing large amounts of taxpayers’ money to clear up. The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to encourage Brighton and Hove City Council to use the powers available to them to deal promptly with unauthorised traveller encampments in the city. And the Petitioners remain, etc. [P001429]
Pakistan (UK Support) — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Civil Rights
Julian Murray Lewis (Conservative, Centre-right): May I gently suggest that my hon. Friend might want to go one step further? These extremists never hesitate to call other Muslims with whom they disagree "unIslamic". Although I see the point of my hon. Friend’s argument that these people are not Islamist and not Islamic, just calling them terrorists and extremists is not quite enough. We need some context, so may I suggest "unIslamic extremists" as a possible denomination for them?
Pakistan (UK Support) — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Mixed Topics
Paul Uppal (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. The events in Peshawar were very salient and pertinent when they hit the news headlines. Is it not imperative, when it comes to discourse on this issue, that people should always remember globally—not just in the UK—that regardless of their background, whether people be Sunni, Shi’a or of whatever denomination, many of these organisations kill people of an Islamic faith? That is the crucial point.
Pakistan (UK Support) — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Civil Rights
Steven John Baker (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my hon. Friend agree that when people commit these atrocities in the name of Islam, they also betray—sometimes catastrophically—the vast majority of law-abiding decent Muslims in this country, who then have to defend themselves? Does he agree that that is a double betrayal for those Muslims?
Pakistan (UK Support) — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Mixed Topics
Jeremy John Elton Lefroy (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the most important ways in which the UK Government, through DFID, can work together with the Government of Pakistan is through support for the education system, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab, where there is tremendous UK support for Pakistani schools?
Pakistan (UK Support) — House of Commons, 2015-01-26
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I think the hon. Member for Bolton South East (Yasmin Qureshi) has the agreement of the hon. Gentleman and the Minister to contribute, but of course, time must be left for the Minister to respond, so a pithy contribution would be orderly.
Speaker’s Statement — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): It will be for the convenience of Members to know that the private Members’ Bills ballot book is open in the No Lobby today until the rise of the House, when the ballot for 2015-16 will close. The ballot draw will be held at 9 am tomorrow morning in Committee Room 10. The draw will be open to Members, media and the public. As soon as possible, the results will be displayed in the No Lobby and made available in the Vote Office and on the website I also remind Members that the ballot for the election of Deputy Speakers is taking place until 1.30 pm today in Committee Room 6. The result will be announced as soon as practicable after the count has been completed.
Occupied Palestinian Territories — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Housing
Justine Greening (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman is right that we oppose that illegal building of settlements, and he is shining a light on some of the decisions that companies themselves have to make about whether they will be part of that activity. It is up to them to speak for themselves, but the Government’s position in relation to those settlements is very clear.
Illegal Migration — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Justine Greening (Conservative, Centre-right): According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, more than 80,000 migrants have arrived in Europe by sea already this year. Some are fleeing conflict, such as that in Syria, or persecution elsewhere; others are economic migrants searching for a better life. Addressing the root causes, not just the symptoms, involves bringing peace and stability, good governance, development and jobs to their countries of origin.
Illegal Migration — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Daniel Robert Kawczynski (Conservative, Centre-right): My right hon. Friend will have seen the terrible suffering in the Mediterranean as people are being trafficked from Libya to Lampedusa. What concrete steps is her Department taking to help the Libyan coastguard to police its ports better?
Illegal Migration — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Justine Greening (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Lady rightly points out that while we in Europe grapple with the challenges we face on migration, comparable challenges are being faced by other countries. It is absolutely right that Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia are now working far more carefully together, and the UK will be playing its role to support them in doing that.
Illegal Migration — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Immigration
Justine Greening (Conservative, Centre-right): We are working collaboratively with the UNHCR. In fact, we have helped just under 200 people through that scheme. The hon. Gentleman should be aware that, through the asylum system, we have received 4,000 asylum applications from Syrians. Critically, what this all shows is that we need to support people where they are. Some 99% of the refugees from the Syrian crisis are still in the countries that border Syria, and the UK has put £800 million into helping them build their lives there and educating their children.
Sustainable Development Goals — House of Commons, 2015-06-03
Topic: Mixed Topics
Caroline Alice Spelman (Conservative, Centre-right): Given the important role the Prime Minister played on the high-level panel on sustainability, will the Secretary of State tell the House what progress has been made in getting a concrete goal on the food, water and energy nexus?