argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-14
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. and learned Gentleman and I have shared this inspiration in the form of an amendment that will also come up on day eight of Committee. Of course, the Labour Front-Bench team will shortly be talking to their own amendment 278, which seeks to deal with this problem by deferring exit day until after the transition has been completed. The idea essentially is to keep the existing legal framework in place, not just for the period up until exit day but for the transition period. That, of course, is one way to solve the problem The Bill, though, cannot adequately deal with the transition, and not just because of the contradictions in clauses 5 and 6. Even if one stands on one leg and squints a little bit at the order-making powers in clauses 7 or 9, none seems capable of dealing with the implementation of a transition period. It is clear, then, that we need answers from Ministers. They have said that they will bring forward a Bill, but they have to ensure certainty for business during the transition period. It could be a two-year-plus period. I do not think that two years is long enough, but if it is to be two years, that is still a long time for businesses to operate without a framework of legal certainty. New clause 14 simply says that Ministers must give details within one month of Royal Assent as to how the ECJ arrangement will apply during the transition.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-14
Topic: Other
Christopher Michael Leslie (Labour, Centre-left): Well, the Minister proves my point. We need a report from the Government very soon after Royal Assent to answer this question. New clause 14 is a very gentle, soft amendment that I hope will nudge the Government into answering that question.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-14
Topic: Other
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): I have said no. I want to give others the opportunity to speak. I took every single intervention in the previous debate—except perhaps from one of my hon. Friends towards the end of my speech—so I want to make some progress The Government have a choice to make today—[Interruption.] I wish hon. Members would stop chuntering. The Government have a choice to make, and they have to make it in relation to our amendment 278.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-14
Topic: Mixed Topics
Wesley Paul William Streeting (Labour, Centre-left): It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin), who, in uncharacteristic fashion, had to knock several lumps out of his own Front Bench to get it to see sense around some obvious problems with clause 6. I have chosen to rise at this point in the evening to pick up on some of the inconsistencies and flaws, revealed during this debate, in the insufficient—in some cases, absent—replies from the Government Front Bench My hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield) asked the Minister very clearly whether the jurisdiction of the ECJ will apply during the transition period. I do not believe the Minister has addressed that, but I am happy to give way if he would like to do so now.
Electric and Autonomous Vehicles — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): On 20 February, the Secretary of State said that he would release the famous letter to Nissan "when it is no longer commercially confidential". —[Official Report, 20 February 2017; Vol. 621, c. 784.] Will he explain whether that will be in 2017, 2018, 2019, or sometime thereafter?
Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Civil Rights
Questions: To ask the Secretary of State what assessment he has made of the capacity of the industrial strategy challenge fund to increase economic growth.
Gavin Shuker (Labour, Centre-left): Can the Secretary of State explain why his challenge fund is directed at sectors that are dominated by an over-representation of men, while many of the professions in which females are over-represented face low investment, low skills, low pay and low productivity?
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Marie Elizabeth Rimmer (Labour, Centre-left): The chairman of the FSB has said that enough is enough and a fundamental review of the business rates should be conducted. Will the Minister agree with the chairman and bring forward a date for a fundamental review of business rates?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Questions: I know the ministerial team has been working hard on this, but the issue with sleep-in shifts, if it is not resolved, is that charities will have to close their doors and the people they support, including those with learning disabilities, will be left without care. Will the Minister update us on the progress on quantifying the back-pay liabilities of those charities and on when an appropriate solution will be delivered?; The life sciences industry is worth £64 billion to the UK, and Sir John Bell’s report last week indicated how important manufacturing was. Will the Minister therefore join me in welcoming the opening of the cell and gene manufacturing unit and welcome further jobs in this industry in the east of England, particularly in my constituency?; This week’s electricity grid connection deal would make the Cardiff tidal lagoon the UK’s largest renewable energy project, generating some of the cheapest power in the country, and it would be a big boost to Newport, but its potential can be realised only with the Government first backing the pilot project in Swansea bay. When will that happen?; Although wind turbines play an important part in the nation’s energy mix, it is alleged that the quality of life and health of some rural residents is adversely affected by noise emissions. Are the current noise limits and recording methodologies sufficient—I am referring to low-frequency noise and infrasound—or should the methodologies be reviewed?; Will the Minister review the current arrangements for the distribution of the mineworkers pension surplus? I am sure it was never envisaged that the surplus would be so high, so is it not time to re-examine that, and seek to give more money to pensioners and beneficiaries?; Trading on the world’s markets as a free trade nation after 2019 will be a bit like swimming in the Serpentine on a winter’s morning: bracing and invigorating but a bit heart-stopping if one is not prepared. Will my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State explain how he is gearing up his entire Department to ensure that British industry no longer debates the rights or wrongs of staying in the EU or the single market but is fully prepared, and up-to-scratch with conferences, seminars and all the rest, to trade on the world’s markets?; The results of yesterday’s renewables sector auction were very beneficial for my constituency. Will the Minister outline what further developments he has in mind to encourage and support the construction of turbines in the UK? How will we ensure, particularly in northern Lincolnshire, that the skills are there to meet the demands?
Mary Theresa Glindon (Labour, Centre-left): Smulders in North Tyneside is a fine example of a company that is already advanced in its own low-carbon growth strategies. What direct support will the Minister give to businesses such as Smulders under the delayed clean growth plan?
Hurricane Irma: Government Response — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Anthony Joseph Lloyd (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister should know that my constituents Christine and Tony Bibby, who are in their early and late 70s, have been stranded on St Martin since the hurricane. They have a desperately worried family here in Britain and are running out of water and food and have no electricity. There has been very little news about what positive action will help this couple. May I have some clarification? Will they be made safe, will they get the emergency supplies they need to sustain life, and will the evacuation proceed very quickly?
Sky/Fox Merger — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Civil Rights
Tom Watson (Labour, Centre-left): I will be brief, Sir. I am very sorry to hear the allegations that the Secretary of State has made, and I promise her that I will go away and look at the evidence. If Labour party members are involved in this, we will deal with them. Let me say to her that I have been as sickened as she has been by the way in which our colleagues in this House have been targeted for doing their jobs. A heavier load is carried by our female colleagues, so let me make it clear: you can either be a misogynist or you can be a member of the Labour party, but you cannot be both. If she gives me the evidence, we will deal with this.
Sky/Fox Merger — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): Good corporate governance in a construction company means that the directors of the company make sure that its building sites, for instance, are safe to work on. Good corporate governance in a supermarket company means that the directors make sure, for instance, that their staff do not sell alcohol to underage kids. One would think that good corporate governance in a broadcasting organisation would mean that the directors of the company would make sure that their organisation abides by good broadcasting standards, which is why I wholeheartedly support what the Secretary is State is doing today. Rupert Murdoch’s defence over phone hacking was, in the end, that his company was far too big for him to possibly know what was going on across the whole of it. That was not good corporate governance, and it could not possibly lead to good broadcasting standards.
Sky/Fox Merger — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Paul Farrelly (Labour, Centre-left): I, too, welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. Five years on, it seems as if little has changed. The newspapers have been cast off, but Rebekah Brooks is back having been reappointed by the Murdochs, and Fox wants to take over Sky. There are a lot of loose ends to be tied up on corporate behaviour and governance, including evidence given to the Select Committee. One is the second part of the Leveson inquiry, which might well reveal more. May I press the Secretary of State on this matter, not least because the Conservative manifesto pre-empted the conclusions of her consultation? When will we learn whether an amended Leveson 2 will go ahead, as the Select Committee unanimously recommended?
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Ruth Stephanie Nicole George (Labour, Centre-left): Rather than proving that Conservative Members are able to count people on Benches—which at times is beneficial to them, but at many other times is not—perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could listen to all the small businesses who are squealing about the massive increases they have seen in business rates and the impact on business start-ups of the changes to universal credit that are going to prevent a lot of people from starting up as self-employed, hitting those in constituencies like mine where there is no support for them.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): I saw a few tumbleweeds on the Government Benches last week. If there is a shiver looking for a spine to run up, it need not bother looking on the Government Benches. After last night’s vote, there were none to be found. The national interest is not synonymous with the interest of the Tory party, as most Conservative Members would like to think, although the word "arrogance" is.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Peter Christopher Dowd (Labour, Centre-left): Far be it from me to give advice, but the hon. Lady should go to a dictionary to find out the difference between "a debt" and "a fee". She clearly does not know what she is talking about. [Interruption.]
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Housing
Stella Judith Creasy (Labour, Centre-left): I want to take up the right hon. Gentleman’s challenge. I am sure that he is proud that the previous Government, of which he was part, extended capital gains tax to residential property sales for non-domiciles, so will he join me in suggesting that we close the loophole on commercial property sales? There is one idea that could raise some money for investment in this country.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Ruth Stephanie Nicole George (Labour, Centre-left): If the hon. Gentleman wants to decide that election pledges were made from any sort of wording that came from any politician or any party leader, I hope he will also be looking over pledges made by those on his side, which came with absolutely no costings whatsoever.
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. We are seeing an historic event tonight: a Government actually filibustering their own Finance Bill! I think that should have a plaque somewhere in this Chamber. I am told through the usual channels that the Conservative Whips told their Members to book hotel accommodation tonight because the Labour party was apparently going to talk the Bill long, even though Labour Members were assured by our own Whips that we would not. They have got to keep it going until 10 o’clock, so their Members can be reimbursed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. With 25 more speakers to go, and the Whips doing their best to cut down contributions, I wonder, Mr Deputy Speaker, whether you could institute a time limit to save Government Members from the incompetence of their own Whips Office. [Interruption.]
Finance Bill — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Hang on a minute. I thank the Government Whips, who have turned out in force, for their advice. I do not know what fear you have put among them, Mr Jones. However, if they were really interested in filibustering, they would have asked you speak. The fact that they did not has probably saved the House. As you well know, that is not a point of order but you have put your point on the record.
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Valerie Carol Marian Vaz (Labour, Centre-left): No, I will not give way The Government did not even try to make it work. The Opposition’s names are very reasonable. My right hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Mr Campbell), my hon. Friends the Members for Alyn and Deeside (Mark Tami) and for Newport East (Jessica Morden) and even the hon. Member for Glasgow North (Patrick Grady) are all very reasonable Members. I know that they would be pleased to sit down with the Government and work out a reasonable solution that would be in keeping with the constitutional position and the democratic will of the country—[Interruption.] This shows everybody that Government Members do not want to listen to the argument. They just want to interrupt—[Interruption.]
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): If the Leader of the House and Conservative Members are so confident about having a majority on the Floor of the House, as they have told us tonight, they should use that majority to overturn on Report any amendments that they do not like. They certainly do not need to start fiddling the system.
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): I have only just started. The right hon. Gentleman must give me a moment That is actually part of the problem, because this is not a one-off situation. This is the latest in a series of measures that this Government have taken since 2015 to move the goalposts, change the rules and fiddle the system in one way or another in aid of their own party advantage when they find they cannot get around this in any other way. There was the example—
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): I will not give way to the right hon. Gentleman, because I thought he was a little too aggressive in his interventions on my hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House. Oh, go on then!
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): Because the proposals are so outrageous that they deserve to be knocked down completely, so we will vote against them. I say to the right hon. Gentleman and others that there is a real sense that having not won the election and having lost their majority, the Government are clinging to power by any means necessary.
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): I will not, because other Members wish to speak There is a sense—dare I say it—of two fingers being put up to the electorate in a contemptuous manner. The Government seem to be putting party before politics. These are the wrong proposals tonight. As the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) said, there are good Members on the other side of the House whom I like and respect. When they go through the Lobby tonight, they will know that what they are doing is wrong and anti-democratic, and I hope they think long and hard on it.
Nomination of Members to Committees — House of Commons, 2017-09-12
Topic: Other
Helen Catherine Goodman (Labour, Centre-left): The logic of the hon. and learned Lady’s position is that were the Conservative party to have 251 seats and the Labour party 250, with the other seats held by a variety of parties, it would still be right for the Conservative party to have a majority on every Committee. That is the logic of her argument. Is that what she is saying?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Charalambos Charalambous (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister confirm what justification there was for voting against Labour’s amendments to the Finance Bill last week that sought to curb the number of individuals claiming non-dom status and improve transparency with regards to offshore trusts?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
John Eugene Joseph Dromey (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister not recognise that it is obscene that rich people should seek to get even richer by salting away their billions in offshore bank accounts, while working people suffer the longest stagnation of wages for 150 years?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Jenny Chapman (Labour, Centre-left): Further to the Minister’s response to my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), will he explain why he thinks people saving for their children’s future would need to make use of accounts in Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands, when my constituents seem to manage it with the use of local building societies?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): According to the Government’s assessment, how many UK citizens and how many UK-registered companies have these offshore accounts, and how much money has the UK, as represented by those two entities, got salted away in them?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister clarify his understanding of the position in respect of non-doms donating to political parties in the UK? In the interests of transparency, will he arrange for all parties to publish lists of non-doms who have donated to their parties?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
Karin Marguerite Smyth (Labour, Centre-left): Last year my right hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) led work in the Public Accounts Committee, and called for country-by-country reporting in an amendment to the Finance Bill, to which I think the Minister has alluded. The Government can now lead the way throughout the world in implementing that provision, while still pursuing multilateral provisions.
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Nicholas Dakin (Labour, Centre-left): Most people have not heard of dollar-denominated trading, but they look at this matter and see one rule for the rich and powerful and another for the weak and vulnerable. Surely the way to lance this boil is to provide full transparency, which means making information publicly available rather than people having to ask about British overseas territories.
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Mixed Topics
Diana Ruth Johnson (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Minister arrange for full details of the merits of sending money offshore to be published, so that my constituents in Hull, many of whom are low-paid but pay their taxes, can see whether it would be appropriate for them to go offshore?
Paradise Papers — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Housing
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): Over 100,000 properties in the UK, worth over £122 billion, are owned by overseas-registered UK companies in the British Virgin Islands and the Channel Islands, and that represents a conservatively estimated £2 billion in tax avoidance a year, enough to close the benefits fraud gap in one fell swoop. That is just a conservative estimate, however, and a third of the properties in the Land Registry do not even have property transaction data. Does the Minister agree that now is an opportune moment to grip the Land Registry and ensure it has compulsory registration of land and property in the UK, with the full structure of ownership and their value, so we can understand the full scale of the exploitation of UK land and property for tax avoidance purposes?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. During the urgent question just now, I asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury for some information pertaining to the levels of usage of offshore accounts. He said that he was unable to put his hands on that kind of information immediately. Is there a mechanism whereby I could prevail upon him to find that information and to put it in the Library? Or is there perhaps a way in which you might assist us to enable that to happen?
Grenfell Recovery Taskforce — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Housing
Stephen Pelham Pound (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State is rightly concentrating on the human face and the human cost of this tragedy, and I pay credit to him for that. However, the structure is also important. Every day, thousands upon thousands of people on the Hammersmith and City line and on Western Avenue have to see this smoke-blackened vertical charnel house—this modern Gormenghast—jutting into the sky. Some local people are saying to me that they would like the building to be dropped and for some sort of memorial park to be built there, perhaps. Others are saying that when the building is no longer a crime scene it must be made habitable again. Does the Secretary of State have a view, and, more importantly, does he intend to consult the local community on the long-term use of the site of Grenfell Tower?
Grenfell Recovery Taskforce — House of Commons, 2017-11-06
Topic: Housing
David Lindon Lammy (Labour, Centre-left): It breaks my heart that many of these people—over two thirds of them—will not be housed by Christmas. Given that the taskforce has found the council to be so inept, is it not right that the Secretary of State should have brought in commissioners? What guarantees can he now give these families that they will be housed? The general tone of today’s statement has lacked the urgency and compassion that are still required.