argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Third-country Trade Agreements — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for International Trade on the implications of EU withdrawal negotiations for potential trade agreements with third countries after the UK has left the EU.
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): Further to the question from my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn), contracts in those trade agreements are worth more than £73 billion of exports and about £74 billion of imports. That is a serious matter for businesses in the Secretary of State’s constituency, and mine, that might be trading under those agreements. In the event of no deal, we will lose those agreements from 30 March next year. Is it time that he and the Government made a statement to the House, to set out in detail the implications for UK businesses of losing access to those trade agreements, which we have been part of negotiating over the past 45 years?
Third-country Trade Agreements — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for International Trade on the implications of EU withdrawal negotiations for potential trade agreements with third countries after the UK has left the EU.
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): I welcome the Minister to his new post, and I hope he stays around long enough to realise how complex the world is in terms of international trade. Will he look forensically at what really happened with Bombardier, which was part of a complex supply chain? He does realise—does he not?—that no deal is as good as staying in the European Union.
No-deal Legislation — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: What estimate he has made of the volume of new legislation required in the event that the UK leaves the EU without a deal.; What estimate he has made of the volume of new legislation required in the event that the UK leaves the EU without a deal.
Rupa Asha Huq (Labour, Centre-left): I thank you for hosting the Patchwork Foundation MP of the year awards last night, Mr Speaker; I thank the organisation for the great work it does for people of non-traditional backgrounds The Prime Minister and her Ministers continue to prove Danny Dyer right, who talked of the "mad riddle" of Brexit. They pose their deal, no deal or no Brexit. What concrete assurances can they give the university representatives I met yesterday about what happens to their millions of euros of monthly research funding if we crash out with no deal on 1 April? The last they heard was a letter from the now long-departed hon. Member for Orpington (Joseph Johnson)—he, they, I and the majority of my constituents want no Brexit.
No-deal Legislation — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: What estimate he has made of the volume of new legislation required in the event that the UK leaves the EU without a deal.; What estimate he has made of the volume of new legislation required in the event that the UK leaves the EU without a deal.
Matthew Thomas Pennycook (Labour, Centre-left): Given that the Department’s role is now largely confined to domestic preparations for exit, many will find that answer deeply troubling. But it is not surprising that no-deal preparations are not being taken seriously, because they have been a bluff from the start. Yesterday, the Chancellor told the Treasury Committee that the infrastructure works needed to prepare the port of Dover for an exit on World Trade Organisation terms would take years, not months. With 113 days left, will the Secretary of State now take this opportunity to rule out a no-deal Brexit once and for all—before this House does it for him?
Manufacturing Industry — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What assessment he has made of the potential effect of the proposed withdrawal agreement and political declaration on the manufacturing industry in the UK.; What assessment he has made of the potential effect of the proposed EU withdrawal agreement and political declaration on manufacturing industry in the UK.
Jenny Chapman (Labour, Centre-left): Labour’s policy of a permanent customs union is supported by, among others, the TUC, the CBI and the Engineering Employers Federation, which said: "Loss of access to both the single market and the customs union would condemn the manufacturing sector to a painful and costly Brexit." On 17 July, this House came within six votes of accepting a customs union as a negotiating objective. Is it not obvious that if the Prime Minister supported it and ignored the empty threats of the European Research Group, there would be a majority in this House for a customs union?
US Trade — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for International Trade on the potential effect of the proposed withdrawal agreement on the UK’s ability to trade with the US.
Angela Eagle (Labour, Centre-left): I repeat the question from the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant), because the Minister did not answer it. He surely has to confirm at the Dispatch Box that the deal means that any trade deals that might be signed cannot be implemented until we are out of the customs union and single market. He just has to get up and say that that is true.
UK-EU Trade Policy Options — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for International Trade on potential policy options in the event that a trade agreement between the UK and the EU is not finalised by the end of June 2020.
Clive Stanley Efford (Labour, Centre-left): The Secretary of State for International Trade promised that he would have 40 trade deals ready to sign the day after we leave the European Union. What assessment has the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union made of his right hon. Friend’s progress on that?
Agriculture: No-deal Planning — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Environment
Questions: What discussions he has had with representatives of the agricultural sector on Government contingency planning on the UK leaving the EU without a deal.
David Drew (Labour, Centre-left): The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs continues to say that there will be no deal with any country that does not share our high standards in animal welfare and environmental protection. Does the Department for Exiting the European Union share those views?
No Deal Contingency Plans — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Karin Marguerite Smyth (Labour, Centre-left): We seem to have a slightly contrary position here. Earlier, we heard from Ministers that there is nothing to fear for manufacturers about no deal and that there are scare stories in this place, but we also hear that there is lots of contingency planning. I have visited manufacturers, and they remain scared of no deal. This week Bristol City Council has published its assessment of a no-deal scenario. Have Ministers met with leaders of Core Cities to discuss and debate what a no-deal scenario means for these drivers of our economies across England?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Keir Starmer (Labour, Centre-left): That is a very sensible position. The Secretary of State suggests that he agrees with the Prime Minister that, if the EU does not co-operate, we cannot be kept in the backstop indefinitely. The problem is that the Attorney General’s legal advice, which was published yesterday states, in terms, "in international law, the" backstop "would endure indefinitely." He went on to say: "This remains the case even if parties are still negotiating many years later, and even if the parties believe that the talks have clearly broken down" That is the complete opposite of what the Prime Minister said she intended to achieve.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Questions: Will my parliamentary neighbour, the Minister for no deal, confirm for the benefit of our constituents in Northamptonshire that the Government have advanced plans in place to ensure a smooth Brexit in the event of no deal?; The German owner of the Barden factory in Plymouth has announced that the precision ball bearing plant and 400 jobs will go, and it blames Brexit for the closure. Will the Secretary of State join me and Plymouth’s Conservative MPs in encouraging Barden’s German owner, Schaeffler, to change its mind and keep this profitable plant open?; The majority of my constituents and I voted to leave the EU primarily to take back control of our sovereignty, and I am struggling to reconcile that with the proposed Northern Ireland backstop and our inability to leave it unilaterally. What reassurances can my right hon. Friend give me following the publication of the Government’s legal advice yesterday?; I welcome the Secretary of State to his post. The North East England chamber of commerce is briefing that, because this deal fails to nail down certainty, it threatens investment and jobs, and businesses in the north-east do not support it. Why is he asking this House to support a deal that will threaten my constituents’ jobs?; The legal position of legislation passed by this House is that we will be leaving the EU on 29 March 2019, deal or no-deal. The events of this week, and I suspect next week, make a no deal outcome more likely, so will the Secretary of State ensure that all Government Departments now make ready and prioritise their preparedness for no deal? Does he agree that for the Government not to do that would be a dereliction of duty?; As the Secretary of State for stockpiling, can he explain to me how he will maintain a supply of the medical radioisotope technetium, given that its precursor has a half-life of less than three days?; On Tuesday, the National Assembly for Wales voted overwhelmingly for a Plaid Cymru motion to reject the British Government’s deal. What notice will the Secretary of State take of this new, emphatic and democratic decision?
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): The Government’s own analysis shows that my constituents will be worse off under this deal, but the Secretary of State argues that they will gain sovereignty and future trade agreements. Can he explain precisely in engineering terms how supply chains between the north-east of England and north-west France, for example, can be replaced by ones with the mid-west of America or Western Australia?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Clive James Charles Betts (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor said recently that backing the Prime Minister’s deal would be better for the country than remaining in the EU. However, during the referendum campaign in February 2016, he said that a yes vote would lead to "very significant uncertainty" and would have a "chilling effect" on the economy. What information can the Chancellor share with the House that has caused him to have such a fundamental change of opinion?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): I agree with the Chancellor that there will inevitably be an economic penalty from leaving the EU. Does he agree that having to comply with lots of rules set by the EU, over which we will no longer have any say—that will be the position under the withdrawal agreement—is part of the economic penalty that we will suffer?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Richard Haines Burden (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor is making a very good case about what would happen if there were a no-deal Brexit. Indeed, in his opening remarks he described it as an act of "uncertainty and economic self-harm". Given that the companies he has talked about, which depend so much on just-in-time deliveries in the motor industry and elsewhere, are most worried and concerned about the prospect of a no-deal Brexit, and as there is clearly not a majority in this House for a no-deal Brexit, although we may disagree about other things, why do we not unite and rule out that option?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Labor
Gareth Craig Snell (Labour, Centre-left): While the Chancellor is explaining the deal, will he explain to the House which trade unions he has sat down and briefed on the deal, and what their response was? The feedback that I have had from ordinary trade union members in my constituency is that, although this deal is preferable to no deal, it is still a long way away from the certainty that they would have hoped to have had in the proper arrangement that they were expecting.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Macroeconomics
James McMahon (Labour, Centre-left): Is it not the truth that there has not been time to consult with the organised trade unions because the Government have been consulting with the hard-line Brexiteers in the European Research Group instead of putting the national interest first My question is this: why did the Chancellor not support his Prime Minister in her pledge to end austerity in the Budget, which would have addressed many of the reasons for the divide in the nation he refers to?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Melanie Onn (Labour, Centre-left): I would like to move the Chancellor away from the party political point scoring and to ask him a serious question about what reassurances he can give to companies in Grimsby such as Young’s, which relies on fresh fish products from Iceland and south Norway. Both are non-EU countries with EFTA and EEA agreements with the EU. How does this Tory withdrawal agreement impact on the certainty of future supply to an industry that employs 5,000 people in my area?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Albert Owen (Labour, Centre-left): I am listening carefully to the Chancellor. He mentioned frictionless trade, but where in the political declaration does it say "Guaranteed frictionless trade"? It said so in the Chequers agreement, but it seems to have been omitted in what we are voting on on Tuesday.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Labor
Marsha Chantol De Cordova (Labour, Centre-left): The Chancellor talks about record numbers of people in employment and says that unemployment is lower, but that is not the case in relation to disabled people. Does he agree that this Government’s record on disabled people is one of more disabled people out of work and more on lower wages?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Labor
Rachael Helen Maskell (Labour, Centre-left): One of the things that really concerns businesses is the availability of skills with this deal. At the moment, they know that there is a plan for growth, which the Government have in the light of their abysmal record on productivity, but that plan cannot be delivered if skills are migrating back to the EU. How will the Chancellor address that?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): Next week, we will make one of the most significant decisions that most hon. Members will ever make in this House, and it will impact on current and future generations. So far, hon. Members have ensured that we approach the debate leading to that decision with the seriousness of tone that it warrants—indeed, I think we have seen some of the best of the House over the past few days—and we have to find a way through On Wednesday, my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) said: "My final plea to the House is as follows. Now is the moment to tell each other the truth… No one is going to get everything they thought they would get. No one is going to receive all the things they were told they would receive. All of us are going to have to compromise, and we are going to have to find a way forward that a majority can agree upon."—[Official Report, 4 December 2018; Vol. 650, c. 802.] I fully concur with those sentiments, and that is what we are about in this coming period I wish to focus on four points—I recognise that a large number of Members wish to speak, so I will be as succinct as possible. My first point, on which I hope we can find widespread majority and common ground across the House, is that we must seek to prevent a no-deal situation occurring by either imposition or default. Secondly—and I say this in as straight a way as possible—it is increasingly obvious that the Prime Minister’s deal is neither politically nor economically acceptable, and neither is it capable of bringing the House or country together Thirdly, as the House looks for an alternative, Labour has proposed a plan that we believe could unite the country, by addressing the concerns raised in the referendum campaign while securing the benefits of a close and collaborative relationship with our European partners. That is what we are about. My fourth point is an expression of a worrying concern, given the current state of our economy, about the impact of a bad deal on our communities.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I would choose what the House is seeking—in good will, I believe—which is a compromise that secures the will of the people while at the same time protecting jobs and the economy. [Interruption.] Government Members shout that that is the current deal, but at some stage in the next few days reality will dawn on people that it is highly unlikely that that deal will secure a majority position in the House. We have to be honest with each other and take this opportunity for an honest expression of views. Not only will the deal not secure a majority in this House, but it is certainly not bringing the country together.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I think we are all of a common purpose, which is to protect the economy and jobs. The six tests simply seek to hold the Government to their own statements, but I do not want to be dragged into a knockabout about that. We are beyond that now; we are now in a situation where the country expects us to work together to secure a majority.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): Let me deal with that. I have with me copies of Labour’s composite motion on Brexit for conference—some of them have Labour party application forms on the back, which might interest the hon. Gentleman. That was a joke—[Interruption.] Not a very good one. At conference, we gave priority, which we have upheld, to securing a deal that will protect jobs and the economy. Only if we cannot achieve that do we have the fall-back position of a general election, but we are striving as best we can to secure the best deal.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I will come on to that, but the point we have consistently made is that we would not need the backstop; we want a permanent customs union and a relationship with the single market Let me press on. Some, I know, long for a no-deal Brexit. I want to mildly chide the Chancellor because he was among the earliest to set that hare running. In an interview in January 2017, he unwisely promoted the idea of changing our economic model to make our country what was described as a low tax haven off the coast of continental Europe. Some seized on that to provide a vestige of credibility for their campaign to crash out of the EU The Government have put the cost of no deal at potentially a staggering 9.3% of GDP. The Bank of England said that a disorderly no-deal Brexit could cause more economic damage than the global financial crash of 10 years ago, with house prices crashing by 14% and unemployment reaching nearly 6%. I appeal to all hon. Members to recognise that we have a duty to our constituents not to allow that to pass. I give this assurance: Labour will not countenance no deal and will work assiduously to avoid it Let me also say this. The Government’s threatening Members with the prospect of a no-deal Brexit to engender support for their own deal serves only to reveal their desperation. It is proving to be completely counterproductive.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: International Affairs
Karen Elizabeth Lee (Labour, Centre-left): I voted remain but my constituency voted leave. This deal is not bringing the House together. It is not bringing Government Members or the country together. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there has to be a better way?
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Macroeconomics
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): I watched the hon. Lady’s contribution to the previous debate; it was interesting how her words coincided with those of Government Members. The use of the words "best endeavours", "ambitions" and "sought for" gave such uncertainty that it was impossible for the general public and others to understand the direction in which the Government are going in the long term. I concur with the hon. Lady’s view I must press on. It is not just Labour Members who are pointing out issues with the finance sector; Members from all parties are doing so, including some on the Government Benches. That view is backed up by economists of many viewpoints in their assessment of the Prime Minister’s deal—including, it seems, the Government’s own. The official analysis produced last week was far short of what was promised, as we said at the time. It took as its starting point the Chequers proposals, which have long been discarded. In doing so, it failed to live up to the standards of transparency that we should expect when engaging in critical decisions such as this Even in what they did publish, the Government admitted last week—as the Chancellor has again today, I believe—that their deal would make Britain worse off. In the closest scenario to the possible deal, we could see GDP nearly 4% lower as a result of the Government’s approach to Brexit. To put that in context, this year that would be around £83 billion. In the long term, the damage is likely to be even greater. Worryingly, the Chancellor described £83 billion being wiped off our economy as a "very small economic impact". Maybe there will be many "little extras" to follow in future.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
John Martin McDonnell (Labour, Centre-left): What has happened is clear: the deal has not convinced the Government side and certainly has not convinced the people. It has not convinced a majority in the House so far The Government analysis estimated that the impact of trade barriers alone could mean an average drop in wages of 3%—£800 a year, in today’s terms. The regional growth impact is worst in our exporting regions such as the north-east and the west midlands. Other organisations have come to similar conclusions. The Bank of England said that GDP would be almost 4% lower by the end of 2023. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research put the damage at £100 billion in real terms.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act — House of Commons, 2018-12-06
Topic: Foreign Trade
Seema Malhotra-Saluja (Labour, Centre-left): Does my right hon. Friend agree that the uncertainty about EU free trade agreements, which currently cover our trade relations with more than 70 countries, is set to be hugely damaging to businesses up and down the country? They are currently worth more than £150 billion.