argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): She did, and I have made it abundantly clear several times during the course of these proceedings that the policy is entirely a matter for the United States, but that my view is that it is divisive, discriminatory and wrong.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Nicholas Soames (Conservative, Centre-right): I strongly agree with the Foreign Secretary on the importance of this country’s alliance with the United States, but does he agree that, whatever others may do, refugees arriving in this country will be dealt with with patience, courtesy and respect?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend for his point. I am glad to see that the bust of his grandfather has been rightfully restored to its place in the Oval Office. I remind him that of course Winston Churchill took a very strong view on a country being able to control its own borders and immigration policies.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): May I therefore say, with your guidance, Mr Speaker, that I do find it distasteful to make comparisons between the elected leader of a great democracy and 1930s tyrants? I really have to say that I think it is inappropriate. As for the exact protocol of when the visit should take place—something about which the hon. Member for Ilford South (Mike Gapes) obviously cares very deeply—I cannot give him any guidance about that; it is a protocol matter.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I will simply have to repeat what I have already said about 15 times this afternoon about my views on this policy, which I think are exactly the same as those of the hon. Member for Wallasey (Ms Eagle): it is divisive, discriminatory and wrong. That is our position. The right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) can find all sorts of other adjectives, if he chooses to. Let him reach into his thesaurus and exhaust the wells of outrage, by all means. We have made our position clear, and we have also secured an important exemption for UK nationals.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): May I just say something in defence of that great democracy, the United States of America? If we look at all the migrants in the world—all those who are living in a country other than that in which they were born—fully 20% of them are in the US. Some 45 million people in the US were not born in that country. I do not think that it is possible to say credibly that that country is hostile to those from overseas. Of course, it is vital that we work with the United States in combating terror and that we deepen our relationship, as we are doing.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I completely agree with the point that the hon. Gentleman rightly makes. President Trump and his Administration have not, to the best of my knowledge, been engaged in terrorist offences on mainland Britain, unlike those with whom the hon. Gentleman and his party were asked to negotiate.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): We will, of course, do everything we can to help the party of schoolchildren that the hon. Lady refers to and to make sure that they have a great trip to the US. If there are any difficulties with their visas, we will assist. As for the Arab Muslim minority in her constituency, of course we must speak up for them and defend their interests and rights. That is why we have made the points that we have about the needs of duals and the needs of UK passport holders.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I completely agree that we must stand up against bigotry and nationalism, but I do draw the line at the comparison that has been made relentlessly this afternoon between the elected Government of our closest and most important ally—a great democracy—and the anti-democratic, cruel and barbaric tyrannies of the 1930s. Continually to use the language of appeasement demeans the horror of the 1930s and trivialises our conversation.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Henry Edward Millar Smith (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary on securing the rights of dual British nationals. Will he undertake to look into the case of some middle eastern and other Asian countries refusing entry to dual nationals from this country?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): Our policy on receiving refugees has not changed, and we have a good record. The United States, to the best of my knowledge, has taken about 12,000 Syrian refugees alone. As I said earlier, I do not think that anybody could reasonably fault the United States of America as a great recipient of migrants from around the world. If we look at the numbers—45 million people in the US were not born in that country—we see that it has a very distinguished record.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Andrew James Bridgen (Conservative, Centre-right): Does my right hon. Friend share my disappointment that so many Members of this House have got so used to our not having control of our own immigration policy that they appear to resent another sovereign country having control of theirs?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): My right hon. Friend makes an excellent point. I would just remind the House that the reason the particular seven countries have been singled out—there has been a certain amount of confusion and controversy about this—is that they were in fact the seven selected by the Obama Administration for the withdrawal of the visa waiver scheme for anybody who had been to those countries.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Nigel Adams (Conservative, Centre-right): Many thousands of people will be comforted by the fact that all British passport holders will be able to travel into the US, and that those who have the legal right to be here will be able to apply for a visa. Seven countries are on President Trump’s list—their citizens are banned from entering the US for a period of 90 days. Every one of those countries bans Israeli passport holders from entering their country. Has the Foreign Secretary had any representations from dual British-Israeli citizens regarding that immigration policy, which is similarly divisive, discriminatory and wrong?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I am glad my hon. Friend has pointed that out. I had alluded to it in an elliptical way, but it is right that the House should be aware of that discrimination and the ban that exists. By the way, the House should reflect on the fact that all immigration and visa policies are by their nature discriminatory as between individuals and nations.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for raising a point about which many Members of the House would have been ignorant until this afternoon. [Interruption.] There we go. Opposition Members knew it. In that case, why did they keep silent?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Tania Mathias (Conservative, Centre-right): Will the Foreign Secretary make it clear that, while America pursues this terrible and divisive policy, which I utterly condemn, the United Kingdom will always be a place where refugees are welcome and made to feel welcome? In that spirit, will he join me in praising and thanking voluntary groups such as Refugees Welcome in Richmond, which do great work in this field?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): Absolutely. I assure my hon. Friend that we will continue to be a great open society in the UK. I was very proud when I was Mayor of London that 40% of Londoners were born abroad, including me. She has repeated condemnation of the Executive order, which has been heard on both sides of the House. As I have said, it is not my place to defend or explicate that policy, but it is there for 90 days and 90 days only, and will be subject to the full scrutiny of debate on Capitol Hill. As we have heard, there is doubt there, too.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): No. The hon. Lady will understand that it does not amount to that. Certain states have been singled out. As I have said, I believe that to be wrong in the sense that it discriminates against people on the grounds of their nationality.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the Foreign Secretary for coming to the House and answering questions so fully. I also thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing such a debate so that we can move swiftly on to the Pension Schemes Bill afterwards If the Foreign Secretary had a very special friend who had been invited to a big party, which would be the better way of influencing them: banning them from the party, or taking their hand and saying to them quietly what you would like them to do?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): My keenness to accommodate colleagues is undiminished, but may I very tactfully say that if people feel that they are going to add further insight to our proceedings with their contributions they can of course continue to stand, but it is not compulsory to do so?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I am afraid that the hon. Lady must have been momentarily thinking of something else when I pointed out earlier that those seven countries had already been singled out by the Obama regime for very substantial visa restrictions.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Felicia Jane Beatrix Drummond (Conservative, Centre-right): In March, I shall be attending a United Nations conference in New York. Can the Foreign Secretary assure me that I, as a British subject born in Yemen, and others like me will not be detained for questioning at the airport’s immigration area?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Atta-Ur-Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Centre-right): The Foreign Secretary has said that British citizens should be treated on an equal basis regardless of religion or ethnic origin. May I say this to him? When I entered the United States before becoming a Member of Parliament, I was stopped by United States immigration officials and asked what country I had been born in. I was born in Pakistan, but I am a British national. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that anyone who experiences the same treatment should write to the Foreign Office, so that we have a record of it and can make the appropriate representations to the United States?
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I assume that that took place under the Obama Administration. Obviously I should be happy to receive correspondence about it, but, again, my hon. Friend and every other possessor of a United Kingdom passport will be free to travel to the United States without let or hindrance.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): As I said earlier, this country has a proud record of taking refugees, and, indeed, of funding international organisations and of campaigning for female victims of sexual violence in conflict. We have done, I think, more than any other country in the world in that regard, and we continue those pledges. As for the hon. Gentleman’s point about the state visit, which has been made repeatedly this afternoon, I repeat: Her Majesty the Queen has extended that invitation, it is right and proper that it should go ahead, and it will.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I think that any fair-minded person would, having listened to what has happened over the last 48 hours, understand that far from supporting the policy, far from acquiescing in the policy, and far from approving or agreeing with the policy, we have worked with the incoming Administration to modify that policy and to secure important protections for UK nationals and for dual nationals.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): To the best of my knowledge, the President has himself dissociated himself from that characterisation of this policy, and I just remind the House that these seven countries do not comprise the entire Muslim world, and indeed, they are the very countries that were singled out by President Obama for thoroughly restrictive visa regulations.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): We have made our position clear on this policy. We believe that the US has a proud record of taking in refugees; it has already taken 12,000 refugees from the Syrian conflict, and I hope that it will think again.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I must say in all candour to the hon. Lady that it strikes me that her question was composed long before she came to the House for this statement and heard what I have had to say. Any fair-minded person listening to what I have had to say about the measure and about what the UK Government have done over the past 48 hours would not conceivably have put things in the way that she did.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I do not think that there is much between our perspectives on this. I have said repeatedly this afternoon that I believe the measure to be divisive, discriminatory and wrong, more or less parroting the hon. Lady’s words—in fact, she parroted me. That is my view. In so far as the measure may turn out to be counterproductive, which is the view of many hon. Members, we are also making that point.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): At the risk of repeating myself, and as I have said several times already this afternoon, we have expressed our clear views about the policy in respect of both refugees and migration from the seven named countries.
US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): It is obvious to the meanest intelligence that we have not complied meekly with this policy but have sought changes and improvements so as to protect the rights of UK nationals and of dual nationals who may have been born in the seven countries that have been identified.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her point of order and for giving me the courtesy of advance notice of it. The right hon. Gentleman is in his place and of course I would want to hear from him.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
Nicholas Soames (Conservative, Centre-right): Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Like you, I thank the hon. Lady for her kindness in warning me that she was going to complain of this. I thought that in her question to the Foreign Secretary she snapped at him a bit at the end, so I offered her a friendly canine salute in return. No offence was intended, and I apologise to the hon. Lady if she was offended. [Interruption.]
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to the hon. and learned Lady, to whose point of order I shall come momentarily. I do not wish to dwell on the previous matter, but my response was, if truth be told, incomplete. I thanked the right hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Sir Nicholas Soames), and I stand by that, for his courtesy in remaining for the point of order, which was proper, and for his apology. However, I neglected to respond to a particular part of the point of order from the hon. Member for Ochil and South Perthshire (Ms Ahmed-Sheikh), which was: would such a statement have been in order? The short answer is no, it would not have been in order; it is discourteous and that expression should not have been used. That said, the right hon. Gentleman has apologised, with considerable grace and very succinctly, and for today we must most certainly leave it there.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Civil Rights
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I beg your pardon, but I am getting ahead of myself. So enticed was I by the prospect of hearing a further point of order from another hon. Member that I neglected to respond to the previous one The hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West has raised her point of order, and I thank her again for her courtesy, but the issues to which she refers are matters for debate. However, what I would say to her is that the Joint Committee on Human Rights not infrequently reports to both Houses on the human rights implications of Bills, and I have a feeling that this Bill may be no exception.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. May I gently say to the hon. Lady that I absolutely respect her sincerity and very proper generosity of spirit in taking the opportunity, but I hope she will understand when I say that I have to be sensitive to the wider interests of the House? What she has said already has been very powerful, and I think it will be widely echoed across the House. I have, of course, written to Tam’s widow, Kathleen and to both of the children to express my condolences. He was a parliamentary giant whose contribution was enormous. He never held ministerial office but achieved a great deal, and we thank him greatly for that service. I hope the hon. Lady will not take offence, but we must move on.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Mixed Topics
Peter William Bone (Conservative, Centre-right): Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. How do we get on the record our thanks to you, Sir, for allowing that statement to run for so long that everything was discussed that could possibly want to be discussed? We do have important other business, such as the Pension Schemes Bill [Lords], to continue with. How do we get that on the record?
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman has found his own salvation. If he is implying that the appetite for commentary, and possibly even speech making, on a matter of immediate interest has been satisfied, I can say only that he is a braver man than I am On the assumption that points of order have indeed been exhausted, I call Mr Edward Miliband to make an application for leave to propose a debate on a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration under the terms of Standing Order No. 24. The right hon. Gentleman has up to three minutes in which to make such an application.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): I must advise colleagues that the debate will be held immediately as the first item of public business today. It will last for three hours and will arise on a motion that the House has considered the specified matter set out in the right hon. Gentleman’s application The scheduled business for today will take place afterwards and, under Standing Order No. 24(7), may continue for the same time beyond the moment of interruption as that taken by the emergency debate. Obviously, there is no list of speakers because Members were not to know whether such a debate would take place. Therefore, analogous to Report stages in debates on Bills, Members who wish to catch the eye of the Chair should simply stand in order to do so.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Kevin Paul Hollinrake (Conservative, Centre-right): I share the right hon. Gentleman’s concerns, but does he agree that we have a responsibility to act and speak responsibly in this Chamber? The seven countries of concern were identified by the Obama Administration, and restrictions were placed on migration in 2015.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Immigration
Simon Hugh McGuigan Burns (Conservative, Centre-right): May I begin by congratulating the right hon. Member for Doncaster North (Edward Miliband) on securing this timely and important debate? It is with a degree of sadness that we have to have it in the first place America has a proud tradition of being a nation of immigrants. People fleeing torture and persecution from around the world have sought refuge on the shores of the United States and, metaphorically, I suspect that Miss Liberty is holding her head in shame because of the events of last Friday. The Executive order is shameful and immoral, but, as I said in my intervention on the right hon. Gentleman, it should not come as a surprise to any of us. Throughout the campaign last year, President Trump made it plain that, as well as building a wall, he was going to ban all Muslims—not security threats, but a religious grouping. It was rather frightening, if one looked at the audiences to which he made that pledge throughout the United States—north, south, east and west—to see the reaction of the crowds. That shows us that not only is he honouring his election pledge, but he is playing to a gallery of people who are prejudiced in favour of this sort of action. That is very sad, because it will not achieve what I assume he wants it to achieve, apart from gaining a potential narrow party political electoral advantage with a core base America should be stronger together, and it should be building bridges, not walls. The Executive order will alienate moderate Arabs and radicalise further those on the radical wing of the Arab world, at a time when we should be building bridges to enable us to expose the evil and violence of some of the terrorists who come out of the middle east, and working with moderate Arabs to end the evil threat not only to us, but to moderate Arab opinion in the middle east.
Changes in US Immigration Policy — House of Commons, 2017-01-30
Topic: Other
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. May I gently point out that if we are to accommodate all colleagues, it will be necessary to have an informal limit of approximately five minutes? I ask Members not to exceed that limit from now on.