argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Covid-19: Winter Plan — House of Commons, 2020-11-23
Topic: Mixed Topics
Mary Kelly Foy (Labour, Centre-left): While the Prime Minister might hope that coronavirus will take the day off this Christmas, key workers in prisons, local authorities and emergency services will be working hard to keep vital services running. Despite that, the Chancellor is apparently set to freeze their pay. Will the Prime Minister order the Chancellor to reverse that decision, or do key workers need to set up unproven personal protective equipment companies if they want to receive Government money?
Covid-19: Winter Plan — House of Commons, 2020-11-23
Topic: Civil Rights
Victoria Jane Foxcroft (Labour, Centre-left): On 12 October, I asked the Prime Minister if he would ensure that British Sign Language was available at future press conferences. He said: "the point is registered."—[Official Report, 12 October 2020; Vol. 682, c. 39.] Registered, but not delivered. Six weeks since that question and eight months since the start of the pandemic, there is still no progress on a sign language interpreter. Will the Prime Minister meet me and others, who rely on sign language interpretation, to work out a solution so that Government communication is inclusive of all disabled people?
Covid-19: Winter Plan — House of Commons, 2020-11-23
Topic: Mixed Topics
Barbara Mary Keeley (Labour, Centre-left): People living in care homes need visitors. The plans to test family members so they can visit are welcome, but there is a big issue with insurance and the need for care homes to have indemnity if they experience a covid outbreak after visits. Care homes are already struggling financially and they should not be left facing ruinous legal fees because they tried to do the right thing and facilitate safe visits. So will the Prime Minister commit to extending the indemnity to care homes, which the NHS already has, plus financial support to help the care sector to pay for spiralling insurance premiums?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2020-11-23
Topic: Other
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. You were not in the Chair last week when I made the longest point of order that had ever been made in the history of points of order—for which I apologise—but at the time I suggested that the Government had tabled their motion on virtual participation in debates and who should be allowed to take part in them at the very last moment and without notifying the Opposition. The Leader of the House has written to me to clarify that he had, in fact, been in touch with the shadow Leader of the House, so that channel had been open and I want to correct the record. I should have been much more precise in saying that the Government Whips Office had not notified the Opposition Whips Office, so I apologise to the House. I just wonder, Madam Deputy Speaker, whether the process that I have used for correcting the record would also be available to the Leader of the House, because he said last week that the reason he was tabling his motion in the way that he did was that the Government rule was that people should to go to work if they could—that is, physically—whereas this afternoon the Prime Minister has made it absolutely clear that even if we are in tier 1, the rule is that we should work from home if we can.
Persecution of Ahmadis — House of Commons, 2020-11-23
Topic: Civil Rights
Matthew Raymond Western (Labour, Centre-left): I commend my friend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this Adjournment debate. He is making a powerful speech. I am shocked not only by the deaths and murders he describes, but at the fact that the Ahmadi people are denied the right to call themselves Muslims and to call their place of worship a mosque, and that they are denied the vote. Does he agree that this is a shocking suppression and persecution of a people?
Persecution of Ahmadis — House of Commons, 2020-11-23
Topic: Civil Rights
John Francis Spellar (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister has rightly drawn the attention of the House to the appalling incidents that take place at the extremes of the spectrum, but are there not also lower-level activities—for example, attempts to organise boycotts against businesses owned by Ahmadis and general lower-level harassment? Should not the authorities be cracking down on such activity and saying, "This is unacceptable in this country"?
Benefit Fraud Investigations — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Housing
Sarah Ann Jones (Labour, Centre-left): A constituent of mine, a mother of three children, recently had her universal credit and housing benefit stopped for over two months because of a fraudulent claim made in her name. She was completely innocent, but she and her young family suffered significant financial hardship. We know that benefit fraud, in universal credit in particular, is increasing, and I know of several other MPs who have had similar cases. What will the Government do to stop innocent families suffering for months just because this Government are failing to detect and investigate fraud?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Order—apologies, Minister. Let me just say to the hon. Member for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham) that there was not time to call him. There was another Member before him on the call list, so there was not a chance that I could have called him before moving on; I do apologise. If he wants to hang around, I will try to get him into topical questions if he wishes to speak.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Housing
Kerry Gillian McCarthy (Labour, Centre-left): I hope next month to introduce a ten-minute rule Bill on the regulation of supported housing. I am particularly motivated by concern that unscrupulous landlords are moving into the sector so that they can take advantage of higher housing benefit rates. There is obviously an overlap with universal credit, so I wondered whether the Secretary of State has had any conversations with her colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about the fact that we badly need to regulate the sector because too many people are being exploited.
EU Exit: Negotiations and the Joint Committee — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Mixed Topics
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): The Government are planning to break the withdrawal agreement they signed only last year, thereby breaking international law and sending us into economic self-isolation. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster knows that a Canada deal is possible if he agrees the protections that are required for workers’ rights and our environment. Will he go back and agree those protections and, with them, a tariff-free trade agreement so that we can avoid the self-infliction of a no-deal Brexit alongside a raging pandemic, which would be a complete disaster for everyone in the UK?
EU Exit: Negotiations and the Joint Committee — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Mixed Topics
Nicholas Desmond John Smith (Labour, Centre-left): The Road Haulage Association is afraid that trade will grind to a halt if there are insufficient customs agents to help goods to cross the border in January. Some 50,000 customs agents are needed. On paper, the Government have allocated £84 million to the task of training the necessary people. I know the Minister has good attention to detail, so will he tell me how many customs agents have been trained from the allocated money?
Covid-19 Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Mixed Topics
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): This weekend, I spoke to pub landlords, café and bar owners and staff across our towns, and they all said that business had plummeted since Wednesday, when we became a tier 2 area. They were all cutting staff hours, some were considering closing completely, and none of them was getting additional support, because the tier 2 job support scheme simply does not work for them. Does the Secretary of State not understand that in order to sustain support for additional health measures, he has to listen to the people who are most affected by them? Will he look again at support for tier 2 and tier 3 and make sure that jobs and businesses get the support they need?
Covid-19 Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Florence Eshalomi (Labour, Centre-left): I have heard the Secretary of State say that he welcomes the Chancellor’s support, and he refers Members to that, but does he understand the impact on the ground, especially on small businesses? A constituent of mine in Clapham is a supplier to the hospitality sector and more than 50% of his business is with pubs, restaurants and hotels. He says that if there is a further downturn in this tier 2, he will not be able to stay afloat. The Government must listen to these small businesses and understand the real-world impact the situation is having. So will he ask the Chancellor what additional provisions the Government are going to put in place right now to help the hospitality sector?
Covid-19 Update — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Mixed Topics
Benjamin Peter James Bradshaw (Labour, Centre-left): Why are the Government still forcing people arriving in this country from countries with far lower covid rates than us into a compulsory 14-day quarantine when it is absolutely crucifying the travel industry? Those people are far more likely to be infected here than they are in the countries they are arriving from.
Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Other
Rosalie Winterton (Labour, Centre-left): With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Lords amendment 2, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 3, and amendment (a) thereto, and Government motion to disagree with Lords amendment 3 Lords amendment 4, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 5, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 6, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 7, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 8, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 9, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 10, and Government motion to disagree Lords amendment 11 I am sure colleagues will see that a large number of Members wish to contribute to this debate. We have had two quite lengthy statements, so there is pressure on time. That means we will be imposing an initial six-minute limit on speeches from Back Benchers. I hope that Front Benchers will keep their remarks as brief as possible in the circumstances to allow others to contribute.
Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Immigration
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): The Migration Advisory Committee has effectively recommended a significant increase in the pay of social care staff, which they urgently need—and they have been under immense pressure this year. Will the Minister accept that recommendation from the Migration Advisory Committee?
Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Immigration
Charalambos Charalambous (Labour, Centre-left): The right hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. We need to ensure that there is documentation, because we have seen the failings of other IT systems in the past and cannot allow that to happen again, especially on an issue as important as people’s rights Although we are open to the Government’s aspiration to move towards a digitally-focused system for all UK immigration, we are also aware of the internal failings that prevail within the Home Office. With that in mind, we urge the Government to think again about adopting Lords amendment 5 Lords amendment 9 would give EEA and Swiss nationals who are victims of trafficking at least 12 months’ leave to remain and access to benefits during their period of recovery after being confirmed as victims of modern slavery. I thank Lord McColl for all his work on this issue and congratulate him on garnering considerable cross-party support. There is an unfortunate absence of domestic statutory provision in England and Wales for confirmed victims of human trafficking on their rights to support and assistance. Over the years, that deficiency has been filled by EU law As things stand, following the end of the UK-EU transition period on 31 December, human trafficking victims will be left in an undefined legal vacuum. Following the end of the EU settlement scheme, victims of human trafficking who are EEA or Swiss nationals will be able to apply only for discretionary leave to remain. The criteria for that are very narrow and it is unclear whether the same treatment as that for non-EEA nationals will apply Lords amendment 9 would provide much needed refuge and support to people who have suffered unimaginable uncertainty and abuse. We hope that the Government will support it. We must tackle the systemic factors that lead to modern slavery, provide support to those who are affected, and encourage more people to come forward to end the perpetual cycle of abuse and crime. I heard what the Minister said, and we wait with interest to see what the Government will come up with, particularly in respect of support for victims of modern day slavery To conclude, this is a bad Bill: it is reckless and ignores the evidence. The Lords amendments, many of which have cross-party support, are a genuine attempt to address those failings. If passed unamended, the Bill will lead to staff shortages in our care system at a time when it is perilously close to collapse; encourage dangerous crossings, as it fails to address safe family reunion routes after Dublin III; and lead to a lack of safeguarding and support for victims of modern day slavery. The amendments have been well debated both here and in the other place, and I urge the Minister to accept them.
Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill — House of Commons, 2020-10-19
Topic: Immigration
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): Can I say to the Government that I am disappointed that they are resisting all of the amendments from the Lords? Clearly, immigration legislation is needed, and new immigration rules are needed in time for January when the transition ends, but the purpose of Lords amendments is to try to improve those rules and the legislation I would say to the hon. Member for Derbyshire Dales (Miss Dines) that that is what this debate is all about—for the UK to decide what principles it wants to embed in the immigration system for the future, and many of the Lords amendments are about establishing principles around compassion and drawing on the history the UK has long had of supporting refugees and also supporting the vulnerable It is disappointing that the Government are not responding to the mild request to have a social care impact assessment. It is only a limited request, but it is the right response to the Migration Advisory Committee’s recommendation that something needs to be done. It recommended a pay increase, which I would strongly like to see. In the absence of that, it said that social care should be added to the shortage occupation list to make sure that that vital service is not overstretched as we go through another difficult winter. The Government have provided no response to that at all.
Covid-19: BAME Communities — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Civil Rights
Stephen James Morgan (Labour, Centre-left): In the light of the latest evidence from the TUC on racism and risk in the workplace, what steps will the Minister take to tackle the entrenched discrimination faced by black, Asian and minority ethnic people at work?
Transgender People: Discrimination — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Civil Rights
Nadia Edith Whittome (Labour, Centre-left): Successive Conservative Equalities Ministers have repeatedly stalled on publishing the results of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 consultation. Leaked reports of a potential roll-back on trans rights have understandably caused alarm. With hate crimes against trans people up nearly 40% on last year, does the Secretary of State agree that her quibbling on this issue is fanning the flames of populist hate towards an already marginalised group?
Transgender People: Discrimination — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Civil Rights
Marsha Chantol De Cordova (Labour, Centre-left): In July 2018, the Government announced that they were seeking views on how best to reform the Gender Recognition Act 2004 in a consultation that closed in October 2018. Nearly two years later, the Government have still not published their response. Trans rights are human rights, and updating the GRA will help to improve the lives of trans people. Today the House will rise, and the Minister has previously stated that the Government would publish their response. When will she finally publish the Government’s response and their plans for reform?
Hate Crimes: South and East Asian Communities — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Civil Rights
Sarah Mei Li Owen (Labour, Centre-left): A petition recently created by Viv Yau has nearly 3,000 signatures already. It calls on the UK Government and media outlets to stop using stock imagery of south-east and east Asian people when talking about covid-19. The disproportionate use of images of Chinese, south-east and east Asian people in masks during the pandemic perpetuates the notion that all of us carry the virus, and it plays a significant role in the recent trebling of racist attacks, stereotyping and abuse. Will the Minister commit to working with Government and public bodies on the use of these images, and meet me to discuss the increase in hate crime during the pandemic?
Domestic Abuse — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Mixed Topics
Janet Jessica Daby (Labour, Centre-left): The Domestic Abuse Bill still does not include critical measures to protect migrant women and girls, which is a necessity for compliance with the Istanbul convention. How do the Government intend to protect vulnerable women regardless of their ethnicity, sexual orientation or immigration status if they continue to fail to ratify the convention?
Racial Injustices: Race Disparity Unit — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Civil Rights
Naseem Akhtar Shah (Labour, Centre-left): The Baroness McGregor-Smith review in 2017 found that the economy could be boosted by £24 billion if BAME disparities were eradicated. I am sure the Minister would agree that that boost would be really helpful to the economy right now. Will she tell me explicitly what the Government and her Department are doing directly to tackle structural racism in the workplace?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Civil Rights
Marsha Chantol De Cordova (Labour, Centre-left): Last week, the Government published details of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities and announced its chair, who has previously said: "Much of the supposed evidence of institutional racism is flimsy." Yet we know that black workers with degrees earn on average 23% less than their white counterparts. The need for action is urgent. Inaction is costing members of the black, Asian and minority ethnic communities both their livelihoods and their lives. What assurances can the Minister give the House today that her Government are serious about finally ending institutional racism?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Victoria Jane Foxcroft (Labour, Centre-left): The new report of the Federation of Small Businesses, "Unlocking Opportunity", identifies a number of barriers faced by ethnic minority-led businesses, which contribute more than £25 billion to the UK economy. Will the Minister raise the report’s key recommendations with colleagues at the Treasury—in particular, the setting up of a dedicated scheme to help EMBs access external finance, helping them to flourish and our local economies to thrive?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): Can I just gently say to the Prime Minister, as I did last time, he may have to go to Specsavers? The Chair is this way, not that way. If he could address me, we would be a lot better.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Housing
Clive James Charles Betts (Labour, Centre-left): I do not know whether the Prime Minister has had a chance yet to read the report commissioned by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on the standard of homes delivered under permitted development. The report found properties with no windows, that three quarters of the properties did not meet the national space standards, and "studio flats of just 16m2 each were found in a number of different PD schemes".To put this in context for the Prime Minister, 16 square metres is just about the size of the base of the ministerial limousine that he gets driven around in each day. Will he now change the rules and ensure that we never again allow slums to be built and people to be asked to live in a space as small as his ministerial car?
Speaker's Statement — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Other
Lindsay Harvey Hoyle (Labour, Centre-left): I have a short statement to make about Select Committees. On Tuesday 24 March, the House passed an order allowing for virtual participation in Select Committee meetings, and giving Chairs associated powers to make reports. I was given a power under the order to extend it if necessary. On Monday 8 June, I announced an extension until Thursday 17 September. I can notify the House today that I am now further extending the order until Friday 30 October In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for three minutes.
Rented Homes: End of Evictions Ban — House of Commons, 2020-07-22
Topic: Housing
Thangam Elizabeth Rachel Debbonaire (Labour, Centre-left): I thank the Minister for that response, but it really will not do, because he knows that his proposals are toothless. Eviction law remains intact, so extra information about the tenant will not prevent people from losing their home, and in the middle of a public health crisis. In a Government statement on 18 March, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government said: "The Government is clear—no renter who has lost income due to coronavirus will be forced out of their home, nor will any landlord face unmanageable debts." Labour wants to hold him to this The evictions ban ends on 23 August. The Government have failed to plan for what happens next. That failure looks set to lead to evictions and homelessness this autumn. Data from Citizens Advice and others indicates millions of households are struggling with rent. Current law makes evictions mandatory, with no court discretion, if tenants are in two months’ of arrears under ground 8, section 8 of the Housing Act 1988, and discretionary evictions can still be made under section 21, which the Government have promised to abolish but so far have not done so. They could have prevented people from falling into arrears by adjusting social security or bringing in emergency temporary legal changes, but they have chosen not to What assessment have the Government made of likely numbers of people facing homelessness? What consideration have they given to public health, with possibly thousands of households becoming homeless as we go into winter? What resources have they provided to councils for the cost of additional advisers and emergency and other accommodation? Will the Minister admit that yesterday’s practice direction will make no material difference to the outcomes for tenants with arrears, as eviction laws remain unchanged The Government made a promise. This is not just affecting antisocial tenants; it is affecting people struggling now. Nobody benefits from renters becoming homeless, nor mortgage payers struggling with the end of the deferral scheme. We have called on the Government repeatedly to act. It is not too late to extend the ban and sort out the legal changes in September. For the sake of everyone whose home is at risk, and everyone who cares, I urge them to act now.