argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Bat Habitats Regulation (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Charles George Eustice (Conservative, Centre-right): I do not have a particular timetable, but the framework is being developed based on the evidence from the research project. I imagine that it could be done relatively quickly I thought my hon. Friend took a rather "glass half empty" view of the parliamentary question and the response to it that he received today. The reality is that Heritage Lottery Fund money is being sought to support the roll-out of this work across England and to create an effective national support network for churches that have bat-related issues. He might have misinterpreted one element of the response, because it made it clear that this is a funding application, a decision on which is expected in March this year, and that that funding will support a five-year project. It is not the case that nothing will be done for five years or that further evidence gathering will go on for five years. If the project is supported, it will be largely complete after five years. There is more reason for optimism than my hon. Friend showed.
Bat Habitats Regulation (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): Obviously, I would not expect the Minister to anticipate not getting the funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund, but can he guarantee that, whether or not that application is successful, this work will be carried out, because it would be perverse if it were dependent solely on the success of that bid?
Bat Habitats Regulation (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Charles George Eustice (Conservative, Centre-right): When it comes to heritage assets, our churches are almost second to none. We have thousands of churches and they provide incredibly important heritage assets, so I think this bid will be a very strong one. If, however, for some reason the bid were unsuccessful, it goes without saying that we would seek alternative means to fund this important work. Major positive strides forward are already being made at one church. Work carried out at St Hilda’s in Yorkshire led to the impact of bats being removed altogether, while ensuring that the bats were still able to roost in the roof of the building. This is an excellent example of peaceful co-existence between bats and parishioners in churches Let me deal with the habitats directive, another point that my hon. Friend raised. The Commission is working on its REFIT—regulatory fitness and performance programme—proposals, looking at the implementation of the habitats directive. We think it unlikely that any major revisions to the list of species protected by the directive will be made, but the Commission is keen to ensure that implementation is proportionate. That work is carrying on. My hon. Friend will know that things do not always move at a pace in the European Union, but I can assure him that we are in regular dialogue with the Commission on this matter, and we are keen to see the REFIT approach to the directive taking place My hon. Friend’s Bill deals with the habitats directive by inserting a notwithstanding clause. The constitutional position is clear: Parliament has the right to set aside directives in the way he describes if it wishes to do so. It would, of course, cause difficulties for our laws internationally, which is why we have tended not to do this. He should understand that we sign up to other international conventions. He sought to make a distinction between the protection of migrating species and species that are here purely domestically. We have signed up to the Bern convention, which encourages wildlife protection in all the countries that are signatories to it—whether or not they are in the European Union and irrespective of whether the species are migrating. The Bern convention makes some reference to bats in this respect.
Bat Habitats Regulation (No. 2) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Other
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the Minister for his thoughtful response to the points that have been raised. I hope that his optimism about the Heritage Lottery Fund bid is well founded and that that project is able to continue. It is not often that I would describe a piece of legislation that I have put forward as being premature, but in the light of what he has said and of the fact that we are shortly to have an in/out referendum, and on the basis of the Bill’s prematurity, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion Motion and Bill, by leave, withdrawn.
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Immigration
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention, but I am not going to go down that route, because my view is that, even if the high watermark of what the Prime Minister said in his recent statement, which is reflected in the documents produced by the European Commission, is maintained, it still falls significantly short of what we promised in our manifesto, and we will still be a million miles away from being able to remove access to benefits, which is what this Bill aspires to achieve and what the British people overwhelmingly support The Prime Minister answered questions after his statement to the House on renegotiation on Wednesday He said: "40% of EU migrants coming to Britain access the in-work benefits system, and the average payment per family is £6,000…I think that more than 10,000 people are getting over £10,000 a year, and because people get instant access to our benefits system, it is an unnatural pull and draw to our country."—[Official Report, 3 February 2016; Vol. 605, c. 939.] There is a dispute about the extent to which such access brings large numbers of people in, but in any event the British people find it an affront that the money of those who have paid their taxes and into our insurance system for years is being used to fund people from another country who have not made such contributions There is a big issue here. Like my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Scott Mann), I am not convinced that the Government have achieved enough, even at the high watermark, to satisfy myself and others. The only solution is to leave. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) is laughing, but she will see that clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Bill have to include the words "Notwithstanding the provisions of the European Communities Act 1972" In other words, in each of those clauses I acknowledge that, under current European Union law, we cannot change our own law as we would wish. In answering the debate that we had two years ago about this issue, the Minister then responsible, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), said that, although he might be tempted, he could not support the Bill because he would be in breach of the ministerial code in supporting a policy that could give rise to infraction proceedings. I fear that the Under-Secretary of State for Disabled People, my hon. Friend the Member for North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson), whom I am delighted to see on the Front Bench today, is in exactly the same position: despite the temptation, he could not support the Bill because in so doing he would be in breach of the ministerial code for raising the prospect of infraction proceedings.
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Mixed Topics
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): Is my hon. Friend suggesting that, in a couple of weeks, when it seems that the Prime Minister will allow a free-for-all for Government Ministers, this Minister will be able to say that he agrees with the Bill?
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Immigration
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): I welcome the hon. Lady’s desire to have evidence-based policy. Surely she will recognise that it must be the first duty of the Government to let us know how many non-UK nationals are currently accessing these benefits. I have put down parliamentary questions on the issue and received answers to the effect that the information is not available.
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Immigration
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): I will press on, if the hon. Lady does not mind; time is short, and she made her case earlier We do not need evidence to discuss matters of principle. In principle, surely it cannot be right that foreign nationals come to the UK and start claiming benefits straight away. We do not need any evidence about that. I am not even interested in how many people do that. I am arguing that, as a matter of principle, that should not be allowed to happen.
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Immigration
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): May I, too, echo the tributes to Harry Harpham, the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough? He was a long-standing servant of his community, including as a councillor for 15 years. I know that he will be greatly missed by all It is a privilege to serve in the House today as the duty Work and Pensions Minister, and to respond to my hon. Friends the Members for Christchurch (Mr Chope) and for Shipley (Philip Davies). Their forensic, constructive and diligent work has certainly kept the focus of attention on this area. The British public have sent a clear message that they are concerned that migrants are incentivised to come to the UK because of the attractiveness of our welfare system. That was clearly set out in the speeches of both my hon. Friends The Government share those concerns. That is why, during the past two years, we have introduced several far-reaching measures to restrict or remove access to a range of benefits for migrants who come to the UK without a job and who have not contributed to our economy. For example, EEA jobseekers can no longer access housing benefit at all. Their access to income-based jobseeker’s allowance is limited to the minimum we argue is allowable under EU law—just 91 days, in most circumstances—and even then only after they have waited for three months. We have also made similar changes to child benefit and child tax credit. On the specific point about declaring a national insurance number, it is the case that the number must be declared when making a benefit claim. It cannot yet be collected through the payment system, but that will be corrected with the introduction of universal credit. As universal credit rolls out, we will remove even such elements, meaning that EEA jobseekers have no entitlement to means-tested benefits whatever The Bill goes even further by proposing restrictions that would apply to EEA migrants who are working and contributing in the UK. The current framework of EU law would not allow us to deliver that, since clear European rules compel us to treat EEA nationals working in the UK no less favourably than UK nationals. However, the Prime Minister is renegotiating in Europe so that we get a better deal for Britain. That includes cutting the benefits EU migrants get to prevent our welfare system from acting as a magnet and to create a fairer system for people who work here and play by the rules. That is just part of our ongoing work to make changes.
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Immigration
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): No, because I am short of time and we want to make progress Other key measures have already been taken by the Government, such as capping economic immigration from outside the EU; clamping down on non-compliant immigrant students while remaining open to the brightest and the best; restricting the right of non-EEA nationals to work in this country and bring in dependants; introducing a maximum fine of £20,000 per employee—more than four times the previous penalty—for employers who pay below the minimum wage ;and making sure that only those who secure graduate-level jobs stay on at the end of their studies. The Immigration Act 2014 will clamp down on those from overseas who abuse our public services, and make it easier to remove people with no right to be in this country Although the Government clearly share the sentiment behind the measures in the Bill, we are unable to support it because it goes beyond what the EU legal framework currently allows and cuts across the Prime Minister’s renegotiation. As my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Scott Mann) said, this Government and this Government alone trust the British public and have offered an EU referendum. The parties now in opposition opposed such a referendum throughout the last Parliament, but we trust the British public. I have set out how we are making considerable progress in this area, and I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch will not feel the need to press the Bill further.
Benefit Entitlement (Restriction) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Immigration
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): In responding briefly to this debate, I thank everybody who has participated, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Philip Davies), who supported the Bill I join everybody in the House who has paid tribute to Harry Harpham, whose tenure in this place was far too short. He had a distinguished period of public service over many years and it is extraordinary to think that he was deprived of the opportunity to spend longer as the Member for Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough The Minister basically said that the Government are very sympathetic to what I am trying to achieve in the Bill, but at the moment their hands are tied by European Union law. That point was reinforced this morning in an interview on the "Today" programme, which you may have heard, Madam Deputy Speaker, in which a former advocate-general made it clear that the only way in which we can regain control over our own laws in this House of Commons is to leave the European Union, and that no side deal can be done that would remove the sovereignty of the European Court of Justice in deciding these issues for us In looking at the rights of people from the EU and the European economic area who are not UK citizens to access our benefits regime, we are completely stymied by the fact that the European Union regards everybody inside the boundaries of the European Union as effectively members of one country with a common citizenship. I believe that the citizens of this country have a distinct and, frankly, superior citizenship right to those from other European Union countries. Why should we not be able to decide, in our own sovereign Parliament and our own sovereign country, who should and who should not have access to our benefits system? That is the principle at the heart of the Bill to which my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley referred A couple of years ago, the then Deputy Prime Minister, whom I have quoted, expressed amazement that people from outside the United Kingdom could obtain child benefit for their children who were not even living in the United Kingdom. We have not even resolved that matter in the draft agreements that the Prime Minister has brought back from his negotiations What is contained in the Bill needs to be introduced and implemented by this Parliament, but that cannot be done until we leave the European Union. Recognising that sad reality, but hoping for the best in the referendum, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion Motion and Bill, by leave, withdrawn.
Parks and Playing Fields in Public Ownership (Protection from Sale) Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-05
Topic: Other
Philip Thomas Hollobone (Conservative, Centre-right): No Question put. A Division was called; Mel Stride and Sarah Newton were appointed Tellers for the Noes, but no Members being appointed Tellers for the Ayes, the Deputy Speaker declared that the Noes had it. Question accordingly negatived.
State Pension Eligibility — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Other
Questions: What support his Department has made available to women born in the 1950s who are affected by recent changes in the age at which they become eligible for the state pension.; What support his Department has made available to women born in the 1950s who are affected by recent changes in the age at which they become eligible for the state pension.; What support his Department has made available to women born in the 1950s who are affected by recent changes in the age at which they become eligible for the state pension.; If his Department will make an assessment of the merits of options for transitional protection for women who will adversely be affected by the acceleration of increases in the state pension age.
Shailesh Lakhman Vara (Conservative, Centre-right): The issue to which the hon. Gentleman refers is isolated and he should regard it as such. The matter has been corrected. It is about time that he took on board all the other arguments that have been raging about this particular issue, rather than a solitary, individual mistake on a website, which has been corrected.
State Pension Eligibility — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Other
Questions: What support his Department has made available to women born in the 1950s who are affected by recent changes in the age at which they become eligible for the state pension.; What support his Department has made available to women born in the 1950s who are affected by recent changes in the age at which they become eligible for the state pension.; What support his Department has made available to women born in the 1950s who are affected by recent changes in the age at which they become eligible for the state pension.; If his Department will make an assessment of the merits of options for transitional protection for women who will adversely be affected by the acceleration of increases in the state pension age.
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): No one could accuse the Minister of excluding from his answer any matter that might in any way, at any time or to any degree be judged to be material, and we are grateful to him.
Private Sector Jobs — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
George Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative, Centre-right): The roll-out of IT across the country is nearly complete. The roll-out nationally will be complete before April, as I said to the right hon. Gentleman last time he asked exactly the same question. It is always good to have old questions: the old ones are always the best. The roll-out is progressing well. As he knows, he has an invitation to come and visit the final digital development, which will start to roll all the other benefits into universal credit in May.
Under-occupancy Penalty — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Housing
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): The number of people subject to a reduction owing to under occupancy has been reduced by 18% since the introduction of this policy, and has already saved the taxpayer £1 billion. We will therefore be maintaining this policy, and will continue to protect vulnerable claimants who require additional support through discretionary housing payments.
Under-occupancy Penalty — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Housing
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): First of all, the £870 million discretionary housing payments fund has been set aside for this Parliament. The one in four looking to downsize will be welcome news to the 241,000 families in overcrowded accommodation and the 1.7 million on the housing waiting list.
Under-occupancy Penalty — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Housing
Michael Jon Wood (Conservative, Centre-right): What guidance is being made available to local authorities on the use of discretionary housing payments so that we can make sure that in exceptional cases, such as when homes have been adapted for disability, they can benefit from the additional money that has been made available?
Under-occupancy Penalty — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Housing
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): In fact, it was about whether it is possible to find such exemptions or whether discretionary housing payments give the right flexibility. What we do not want to do is create an artificial line that some people will then just fall beneath and not be able to get support. The £870 million gives the flexibility to work with different agencies. Let us remember: the 1.7 million people on the housing waiting list and the 241,000 families in overcrowded accommodation welcome any moves to help to free up those valuable family homes.
Under-occupancy Penalty — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Housing
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): We are very proud of our record and refute the allegations of that investigation. I absolutely will not abandon the 241,000 families in overcrowded accommodation and the 1.7 million on the housing waiting list. They want us to do this and we will carry on doing it.
Under-occupancy Penalty — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Justin Paul Tomlinson (Conservative, Centre-right): I do not believe it does discriminate. Discretionary housing payments are there to make sure that nobody falls under an artificial line. As a Government, we have trebled the support for victims of domestic abuse to £40 million, a measure I think people on all sides of the House welcome.
Pensioners’ Incomes — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Huw William Merriman (Conservative, Centre-right): Given that 28% of my constituents are over 65, compared with a national average of 17%, the Minister’s answer is welcome news indeed. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that pensioners claim all their state entitlement?
Universal Credit Work Allowance — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
George Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative, Centre-right): The changes to universal credit work allowances form part of a broader package of measures, including the introduction of the new national living wage, the increase in the personal tax allowance and the enhanced package of childcare support. Importantly, the single taper rate of 65% ensures that the benefits of work are clear and that support is withdrawn at a predictable and consistent rate, unlike under the existing tax credits arrangement.
Women in Employment — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
Lucy Claire Leigh (Frazer) (Conservative, Centre-right): It is absolutely vital that after women have had children, they have the option to go back to work if they want to. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that her Department encourages that?
Workless Households — House of Commons, 2016-02-01
Topic: Mixed Topics
George Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend’s question is a strong endorsement of the reforms that have reduced the number of workless households in the south-east by such a large number. Since 2010, the claimant count in Crawley has fallen by 60%, and the youth claimant count has fallen by 75%. Getting people into work clearly has a huge effect. However, my hon. Friend should not be too unkind to the Opposition. I know that many Labour Members who are not now on the Front Bench think that they should be engaging with us on welfare reform, but their new leadership does not believe in that; it believes only in opposition.