argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): They say that success has many fathers, and I hope that is true of the Bill because this debate has been a veritable custody battle. My right hon. Friend the Member for Maldon (Mr Whittingdale), whose name appears first on the back of the Bill, gave a second opening speech to explain where much of it has come from. My right hon. Friend the Member for Didcot—[Hon. Members: "Wantage."]—made a brilliant speech. I think of my right hon. Friend the Member for Wantage (Mr Vaizey) as the Member for Didcot because of that great big power station, which he so resembles; sadly, it has now fallen down. He developed much of the detail of the Bill and deserves enormous credit for his work Between us, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, who, with me, will take the data measures through the Committee, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, who we could say is the mother of the Bill, and I—I am honoured and privileged to be the Bill Minister—all claim credit for parts of the Bill. It has been a team effort, and a huge amount of work over several years has gone into bringing the Bill to this point. I want to thank all the Ministers and the many officials and stakeholders who have been involved in its development This has been an excellent debate, with insightful and thought-provoking contributions from all sides of the House. We have heard about the increasing importance of digital technology and infrastructure to our constituents and the economy. I am glad that there seems to be a consensus about the importance of the subject. We have heard some impassioned pleas to ensure that we protect the vulnerable, and the Bill takes steps to do so Technology is transforming the world in which we live—our homes, work and daily lives—and the Bill seeks to make the benefits of those transformations as big as possible while mitigating some of the inevitable costs. We need to ensure that our laws and infrastructure keep pace with this great change. We must tackle the problems the change brings and seize on the opportunities We have the best superfast broadband coverage and highest take-up of all major European nations, but we want us to have more. Although nine out of every 10 homes and businesses can now access superfast speeds, and we are on track to hit the target of 95% coverage by 2017, we want high-speed broadband for all. The Bill takes the next step, with the universal service obligation. In the same way, as we deliver through infrastructure the internet that enriches our lives, we will also take steps to protect children from online pornography, addressing harms highlighted by many in the Chamber. Likewise, the Government Digital Service has made the UK Government one of the first digital-by-default states, in a model replicated the world over, but we can do more. The Bill will strengthen how we use Government data to deliver better public services.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): I reassure my right hon. Friend that the Government Digital Service goes from strength to strength. It secured significant extra funding in the spending review and is delivering, as it has done and will continue to in future.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s supportive comment about how the Government have done on digitisation. We have made a huge amount of progress and are one of the world leaders. Some states find this process easier, partly because of national culture. Estonia bases its Government digital services on a universal identity system that we disagree with here; it has a much more willing approach to having an ID card system than the UK does. Also, by its nature our country is more complicated and much bigger, so things are more complicated here, but we can learn a lot from the brilliant work Estonia is doing. I have personally worked with the Estonian Government to take the lessons and apply them in our own context There were three areas in the debate that really got the House going. The first was age verification. Incredibly strong speeches were made on that by the right hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart), the hon. Members for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) and for Bristol West (Thangam Debbonaire), my right hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mrs Miller), my hon. Friends the Members for Devizes (Claire Perry), for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) and for Eastbourne (Caroline Ansell), and others. Age verification is an incredibly important step forward. Legislation is in place to deal with the online abuse that many Members also raised—the cyber-stalking and harassment—and, as Members of Parliament, we all understand the challenges that we face on that. We remain committed to improving online safety; it is a challenging area, but we will continue to work to push that forward. The views of the House will be key to that process.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): No, I do not. We have tried to devise them in such a way that they have an impact on both overseas-hosted sites—they must, because of the international nature of the internet—and free sites Many Members asked questions about blocking and user-generated content. I will take those away and no doubt return to them in Committee. I am very clear that the Bill takes us forward. We need to listen to the views of the House to ensure that we get the details right The second area in which there was a huge amount of interest was broadband. I am incredibly excited that 91% of premises now have access to superfast broadband. The universal service obligation in the Bill is a huge step forward, bringing high-speed broadband to all A few questions were raised on the detail, not least the 10 megabits assessment. As I said in an intervention, the Bill puts in place the power to have secondary regulations to ensure that if we need to increase the minimum speed we can do that. That is a very important step forward. Many Members asked about the exact design of the USO, in particular how we will make sure the speed is appropriate. Ofcom will consult on the precise design of the USO in the autumn, so that we can make sure we get the details right.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): There is a fund to ensure that we get fast broadband out to as many people as possible. There is something that every single Member can do to make sure that that fund goes as far as possible. The contracts are structured so that the more people take up broadband, the more the local authority or delivery partner gets back in a clawback. They then spend that money on reaching more premises and more households. I urge everybody to run a broadband take-up campaign in their constituencies, because the more people who sign up for broadband in a Government-supported Broadband Delivery UK area—about 20% of households —the more money comes back to the programme and the more houses can be reached. The clawback means that all of us can have a direct impact on how much broadband is delivered in our local areas.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): I just want to be clear, because many of my constituents will be listening carefully, on what 10 megabits per second actually means. The Minister, in an intervention, used the word "minimum" when he said that the universal service obligation would be 10 megabits per second. Is he saying that it is the Government’s intention that some broadband speeds should never fall below 10 megabits per second, no matter what their neighbours, or anybody else who is sharing capacity, are doing?
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend raises an important point. I see 10 megabits as the absolute minimum, but the definition of what has been advertised in the past for high-speed broadband is a really important issue. This is not an area of statutory regulation, because we do not have statutory regulation for advertising. The Advertising Standards Authority makes the rules. It is consulting on changing the so-called "up to" definitions in advertising to make sure that there is a tighter definition so that people get what is advertised. I think it is fair to say that, should that change go through—it is a non-statutory area—it would be widely supported across the House Fibre to new homes was raised by many Members, so let me give this answer. In January, it will become law that superfast broadband needs to be supplied to new homes. There is a commitment to provide fibre to sites with more than 100 new premises. This is a big step forward. Lots of people asked questions about it; secondary regulations went through; the reason it is not in the Bill is that we think we have made the progress needed to ensure that we deliver in this space Likewise, many people asked about agreements on landowners’ rights under the electronic communications code, which I agree is an incredibly important step forward. I pay particular tribute to my right hon. Friends the Members for Maldon and for Wantage for driving this through. The new code will be a baseline that removes a lot of the room for dispute. It will apply only to new contracts, but many if not most contracts and agreements for siting masts will remain on commercial terms. It will not be required to use the new code; the new code will be the baseline from which the negotiations can take place Let me touch on the Opposition Front-Bench contributions. I felt that the two Labour contributions were well informed and the agreement on the vision was very positive. I would like to react to a few points. Sadly, I thought there was a rather shrill position on data sharing, and I was slightly disappointed with it. Given that we have had two years of open policy making and a full public consultation, it was a bit of surprise to hear that the Labour Front-Bench team was not involved The hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah) was wrong about the Communications Act 2003 when she said that measures build on Labour’s Act and that it was a pity that no progress has been made since 2003. Actually, this Bill builds on the Telecommunications Act 1984. The hon. Lady was also a bit muddled over the BBC. When she argued for more BBC spending power, I was not sure whether she wanted the licence fee to be put up. I think that making costs for phone masts lower is an important part of rolling out the infrastructure to make sure that we get as much coverage for 5G and 4G as possible. We can take up all these points in Committee.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman tempts me on the BBC charter. I can tell him that it will be published shortly, and that there will be a debate in both Houses to take note of it, which is the normal process.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Edward Vaizey (Conservative, Centre-right): Talking of publishing documents, I wonder whether, given the brilliance of the Bill and the forthcoming charter, my right hon. Friend could also illuminate the House on whether he plans to publish a fantastic digital strategy showing how the United Kingdom can thrive by investing in its hugely successful technology industries.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): The Government as a whole are an enthusiast for industrial strategy, and digital must underpin the industrial strategy. As the digital Minister, I am a great enthusiast for digital strategy, and I pay tribute to the work that my predecessor did and the service that he gave. He did an enormous amount of work in both the cultural and the digital spheres to ensure that the United Kingdom was at the forefront of digital nations; indeed, I would say that all his work contributed to a strategy. He said that he wanted, in future, to use Broadband Delivery UK as a taskforce to go around the country improving the delivery of broadband. It was almost as though he was looking for a job.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Edward Vaizey (Conservative, Centre-right): While we are on the subject of how hard I worked as a Minister, let me point out that I worked incredibly hard on radio. I wonder whether my right hon. Friend could illuminate me on when he will introduce the proposals for the deregulation of radio on which I worked so hard.
Digital Economy Bill — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Technology
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): I know that my right hon. Friend and the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central are good friends and admirers of each other, so I will say likewise that any proposals on radio will come forward shortly Overall, the Bill has been well received. It drives Britain forward in the right direction. It gives us an opportunity to secure our digital future, to secure the infrastructure and connectivity that we all know we need, to improve public services through better use of data, and to secure protections for citizens in a digital world. I commend it to the House Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time. Digital Economy Bill (Programme) Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83A(7)), That the following provisions shall apply to the Digital Economy Bill: Committal 1. The Bill shall be committed to a Public Bill Committee Proceedings in Public Bill Committee 2. Proceedings in the Public Bill Committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion on Thursday 27 October 2016 3. The Public Bill Committee shall have leave to sit twice on the first day on which it meets Proceedings on Consideration and up to and including Third Reading 4. Proceedings on Consideration and any proceedings in legislative grand committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour before the moment of interruption on the day on which proceedings on Consideration are commenced 5. Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the moment of interruption on that day 6. Standing Order No. 83B (Programming committees) shall not apply to proceedings on Consideration and up to and including Third Reading Other proceedings 7. Any other proceedings on the Bill (including any proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments or on any further messages from the Lords) may be programmed.—(Chris Heaton-Harris.) Question agreed to. Digital Economy Bill (Ways and Means) Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 52(1)(a)), That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Digital Economy Bill, it is expedient to authorise: (1) the charging of fees; (2) the imposition of financial penalties; and (3) the payment of sums into the Consolidated Fund.—(Chris Heaton-Harris.) Question agreed to. Digital Economy Bill (Money) Queen’s recommendation signified. Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 52(1)(a)), That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Digital Economy Bill, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of money provided by Parliament of: (1) any expenditure incurred under or by virtue of the Act by a Minister of the Crown, a person holding office under Her Majesty or a government department; and (2) any increase attributable to the Act in the sums payable under any other Act out of money so provided.—(Chris Heaton-Harris.) Question agreed to.
Faulty Tumble Dryers (Fire Risk) — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Transportation
Margot Cathleen James (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman is quite right that there are circumstances where a fault identified in a car would result in a complete product recall; indeed, there are circumstances that would lead to a complete product recall of white goods as well. It does depend on the nature of the fault in the car, as it does depend on the risk assessment with the white goods.
Faulty Tumble Dryers (Fire Risk) — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Energy
Kevin John Foster (Conservative, Centre-right): Would the Minister agree that one of the big issues is that, even where there is a recall, the average success rate in the UK is 10% to 20%? Despite websites like the one run by the Electrical Safety Council through its Electrical Safety First charity, if there is only a 10% to 20% success rate, we are, even with a recall, still going to have many products out there.
Faulty Tumble Dryers (Fire Risk) — House of Commons, 2016-09-13
Topic: Energy
Margot Cathleen James (Conservative, Centre-right): I have been in contact with trading standards, and to date I have been satisfied with its approach. The advice and guidance through the process of modification that Whirlpool is implementing whereby one has to attend the tumble dryer while it is carrying out its operation is certainly inconvenient—I would be the first to admit that. If one has dual meters so that machines can be put on overnight, that does not help with energy conservation. However, I am not yet persuaded that the product is necessarily unsafe, because the very few fires overall in terms of the 5 million machines that have been sold have mostly been contained within the machine. On being present, bearing in mind what trading standards believes to be a very low risk, I think that the advice is reasonable given that a total product recall is unlikely to get back more than one in four machines.
Review on Antimicrobial Resistance — House of Commons, 2016-07-05
Topic: Technology
Questions: What plans the Government have to lead the international response to the recommendations of the final report of the Review on Antimicrobial Resistance, published in May 2016.; What plans the Government have to lead the international response to the recommendations of the final report of the Review on Antimicrobial Resistance, published in May 2016.
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is right to champion these new technologies. In fact, the Department has already invested in research into CRP. We look forward to seeing what that brings and, in due course, to seeing how it might move forward. It is very much already on our radar.
NHS Services for EU Nationals and UK Citizens Abroad — House of Commons, 2016-07-05
Topic: International Affairs
Questions: If he will make an assessment of the potential effect of the UK leaving the EU on the availability of NHS services for (a) EU nationals living, studying and working in the UK and (b) UK citizens abroad.
Jeremy Richard Streynsham Hunt (Conservative, Centre-right): Before I start, the House will want to mark an important milestone, which is that this year, alongside Arnold Schwarzenegger, Brian May, Camilla Parker Bowles and Meat Loaf, the NHS is 68 years old, and its birthday is, in fact, today. I know that we will all want to wish the NHS and all who work there a very happy birthday As long as the UK is subject to EU law, current arrangements remain in place. As we move to a new relationship with Europe, our guiding principle will be to get the best possible deal for British citizens who live and work in, and who visit, EU countries. An EU unit will be set up in the Cabinet Office and will report to the Cabinet, and my Department will feed into its work.
Local Dispensing Arrangements — House of Commons, 2016-07-05
Topic: Social Welfare
Alistair James Hendrie Burt (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Gentleman’s support for these services is well known and what he says is right. The regulations do protect the more vulnerable, but when I next look at them, I will make sure that they fulfil his requirements.
NHS Bursaries: Student Nurses — House of Commons, 2016-07-05
Topic: Education
Questions: What assessment he has made of the potential effect of the proposed removal of NHS bursaries on the number of applications from mature students for nurse training places.
Benedict Gummer (Conservative, Centre-right): Mature students represent a significant proportion of the nursing, midwifery and allied health professions’ workforce. Looking at what happened following the introduction of the maximum £9,000 per annum tuition fees in 2012, the latest UCAS data for last year show that full-time mature student numbers have now significantly exceeded previous levels.
NHS Bursaries: Student Nurses — House of Commons, 2016-07-05
Topic: Education
Questions: What assessment he has made of the potential effect of the proposed removal of NHS bursaries on the number of applications from mature students for nurse training places.
Benedict Gummer (Conservative, Centre-right): I echo the hon. Gentleman’s remarks about the hon. Member for Lewisham East (Heidi Alexander). She gave the House admirable assistance in challenging the Government, and I regret her loss from the Opposition Front Bench The latest figure from UCAS, for 2015, shows that the number of mature student applications has risen since the introduction of £9,000 tuition fees, but the hon. Gentleman is right to identify that factor as a challenge in relation to our new plans. That is why we asked open questions during the consultation, and I hope that, now that it has closed, we shall be able to respond to those questions to ensure that we can give the best possible assistance to mature students who want to become nurses.