argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Covid-19: BAME Key Workers — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Olukemi Olufunto Badenoch (Conservative, Centre-right): Many stakeholder recommendations are already in progress, as my hon. Friend states, and as part of existing Government work, we are collecting better data on ethnicity—that was one of the recommendations. We agree that that is imperative and we are working to overcome technical barriers. NHS employers have published some excellent frameworks and occupational risk assessment tools, which can be used now; the race disparity unit is working on communication with covid teams across Departments; and I have said that further research to fill the gaps in PHE’s review is one of my immediate priorities.
Covid-19: Gender Pay Gap Reporting — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Elizabeth Mary Truss (Conservative, Centre-right): To ease the burdens on businesses due to coronavirus, we suspended enforcement of the gender pay gap reporting in March. Despite that, more than 5,500 companies have reported to date, and employers continue to do so.
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Elizabeth Mary Truss (Conservative, Centre-right): As we recover from the covid-19 pandemic, the Government will ensure that everyone has the opportunity to succeed, which is why the Prime Minister announced that we are setting up a new commission on race and ethnic disparities, and why we will be hosting an international LGBT conference once international travel allows. We will work to support businesses to maintain some of the positive changes we have seen, such as greater flexible working, which benefits women, men and their families.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I am a huge admirer of Dr Munira Mirza, who is a brilliant thinker about these issues. We are certainly going to proceed with a new cross-governmental commission to look at racism and discrimination. It will be a very thorough piece of work, looking at discrimination in health, in education and in the criminal justice system. I know that the House will say we have already had plenty of commissions and plenty of work, but it is clear from the Black Lives Matter march and all the representations we have had that more work needs to be done, and this Government are going to do it.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrea Marie Jenkyns (Conservative, Centre-right): Following the disgraceful events of the last week, with folks defacing national monuments, including Churchill and Queen Victoria, and offending the memory of hero PC Keith Palmer, what will the Prime Minister do to uphold British values and carry out the rule of law?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): We have not, because in addition to the £3.2 billion, we have already put in another £1.6 billion to support councils delivering frontline services, plus—from memory—another £600 million to go into social care. I want to return to this point about poverty. We want to tackle deprivation in this country. I want kids to go back to school. The unions will not let the right hon. and learned Gentleman say the truth. A great ox has stood upon his tongue. Let him now say that schools are safe to go back to.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I certainly had no correspondence about the matter myself, nor as far as I am aware did any of my officials, but if there is anything to be said, I think the hon. Gentleman has written to the Cabinet Secretary, and I know that he will be writing back.
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Robert Butler (Conservative, Centre-right): The reopening of non-essential shops in Aylesbury on Monday has been a very welcome boost to restart the local retail sector. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that he will do everything necessary to stimulate the rest of the Buckinghamshire economy in the weeks and months to come, for example, by easing restrictions on outdoor tables and chairs, cutting unnecessary regulation and, perhaps most importantly, providing a dedicated stimulus for our small businesses—the businesses for which the county is rightly renowned?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Public Lands
Jonathan Edward Gullis (Conservative, Centre-right): In Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke, I have the incredible Chatterley Whitfield colliery. Once the beating heart of the industrial revolution, Chatterley is now, sadly, at risk of being lost. Will my right hon. Friend support me, Stoke-on-Trent City Council, Historic England and the Friends of Chatterley Whitfield to protect and preserve this historic landmark by creating an industrial heritage park to stimulate tourism, create new green jobs and memorialise the history from the pits to the pots?
Engagements — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Public Lands
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate my hon. Friend and the Friends of Chatterley Whitfield colliery on the ambition that he has just outlined for a heritage park. It is a proposal that he needs to work up in more detail and bring to the Government, and we will certainly look at it with interest.
Coronavirus — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes, I do agree. I pay tribute to Marcus Rashford. The way he has conducted himself in making his argument has been absolutely brilliant. I was reading Harry Potter to my son last night, and it was clearly still stuck in my mind at 7 o’clock this morning, when I started on the TV. We all make errors sometimes, and I apologise to Marcus for getting his name wrong on one occasion. I had no reason to make that mistake, but what really matters is his brilliant campaign and the volunteering that he has done throughout this crisis.
Coronavirus — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Laurence Anthony Robertson (Conservative, Centre-right): I represent a number of aerospace manufacturing companies; the whole sector is currently very hard hit and is particularly worried about the impact of the 14-day quarantine. The Secretary of State will know far better than I, but is it not possible to do very simple temperature checks on people as they come into this country?
Coronavirus — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Immigration
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): I have looked into that idea in great detail, and I am afraid that I am advised, and have been persuaded by that advice, that it will not work. It has been tried in other parts of the world and they have found that the number of false positives is very high, meaning that they end up quarantining more people. The number of false negatives is also very high, so such checks actually find very few of the people they are looking for. I am afraid it is not a recommendation that I feel I could make on the current evidence that I have seen.
Coronavirus — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Daniel Rayne Kruger (Conservative, Centre-right): Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating the British Army units based in my constituency, in Wiltshire, on the support that they have given to the NHS in coping with the crisis on logistics, building the Nightingale hospitals and so on? Does he welcome the new spirit of collaboration and openness by the NHS, which has shown a great willingness to collaborate with other parts of the public sector? Can we hope that that might be sustained?
Coronavirus — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Matthew John David Hancock (Conservative, Centre-right): When the demand for PPE shot up, as it did not only here, but around the world, we worked with so many companies to deliver extra PPE, and we have managed to deliver on what was needed. That is why we have now the medium-term supply chains in prospect. I pay tribute to all my commercial team, who did extraordinary and sometimes innovative things in order to make that happen, and that is what they did.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (Accession) — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. If everyone who has expressed an interest in speaking is to have the chance to do so, we will have to go rather faster. I make no criticism of the Secretary of State, who has had to answer complicated questions and give lengthy answers. If the questions are shorter, then the answers can also be shorter, and then everyone will get a chance to come in.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (Accession) — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Elizabeth Mary Truss (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend is right. There are people in this Chamber who seek to do our country down and say, "We can’t achieve this. We can’t sign up to these deals. It is all too difficult. Let us have another consultation and delay it for another few years." Then there are those people who are go-getters, who want to help businesses in their constituencies to succeed, and who want to help us recover from coronavirus. I know which side I am on.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes. The hon. Gentleman’s signature is unique, and it is recorded here in the House because he will at some point have put his signature in a book in front of the Clerks—when he swore in at the beginning of this Session of Parliament, he will have gone out there and given his signature—so his signature on that deferred Division form is his form of identity. If the hon. Gentleman were to suggest to me that there was some sort of forgery going on, we would have to look at that, but for the moment hon. Members are honourable and their signature identifies them.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order. We are not going to have a prolonged argument about it; the signature is the identity. If the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that some sort of personation has occurred or some sort of fraudulent action has occurred, I hope he will come to see Mr Speaker about it privately, because it would be a very serious allegation. That not being the case, I am certainly satisfied that hon. Members are honourable and there is no suggestion that anyone has attempted to vote who does not have the authority to do so, on that subject or on any other subject.
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): Yes, the hon. Gentleman, as usual in these matters, is absolutely correct. The House will be well aware that when changes are made to Select Committees—the chairmanship, the membership, the name, or any changes made to a Select Committee—they appear on the Order Paper and the matter comes before the House. There is the potential for a vote to take place upon it, so, yes, I can confirm that these matters will be dealt with in the proper manner Virtual participation in proceedings concluded (Order, 4 June).
Points of Order — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): As we have had a pause between the previous business and the next business, I do not propose to suspend the House for three minutes. It appears to me that everyone who was going to leave has already left, so let us go directly to the 10-minute rule motion. I call Tracey Crouch to move the motion.
Sexual Offences (Sports Coaches) — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): I was giving the hon. Gentleman the chance, in a lawyerly way, to say that he is opposing the Bill in order that he might say what is good about it, but given the time pressure today, I would appreciate it if he did not try to do that, as he cannot now speak in support. I note that he has registered his support for the Bill, and I think the House and the hon. Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tracey Crouch) are grateful for that Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Tracey Crouch, Richard Graham, Sarah Champion, Jim Shannon, Carol Monaghan, Sir Roger Gale, Bambos Charalambous, Damian Collins, Christina Rees, Jonathan Gullis, Anthony Mangnall and Holly Mumby-Croft present the Bill Tracey Crouch accordingly presented the Bill Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 10 July, and to be printed (Bill 140).
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): I should explain that in these exceptional circumstances, although the Chair of the Committee would normally sit in the Clerk’s Chair during the Committee stage, in order to comply with social distancing requirements I will remain in the Speaker’s Chair although I will be carrying out the role not of Deputy Speaker but of Chairman of the Committee. If Members obey the rules to the letter, the occupant of the Chair at this time should be addressed not as Deputy Speaker but as Chairman of the Committee. Just before we commence, I should inform the Committee that there has been a production error on the amendment paper. The names of Bob Blackman and Nick Fletcher should not have been published in support of new clause 4 and new clause 5 Clause 1 Divorce: removal of requirement to establish facts etc
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Fiona Claire Bruce (Conservative, Centre-right): I absolutely agree—indeed, not just from the very beginning of a marriage, but from before it, as I shall mention shortly when I refer to new clause 1 I return to the important point that a great many family breakdowns may be a lot more salvageable than is commonly assumed, and therefore help towards that is important. Statistics bear this out: only 9% of married couples who split one year later could be categorised as high conflict couples who reported quarrelling a lot in the year before the split, and 60% of married couples who split were low conflict couples who also reported some degree of happiness. This Bill should have focused on helping to keep them together, not least, as has just been mentioned, by offering every couple going into marriage a pre-marriage course Such courses would help couples to appreciate that it is not all plain sailing; to understand what the commitment they are making will involve in practice and how to resolve conflict; to understand that better times do not always follow a break-up; and to equip themselves to persevere through difficulties to better times within their marriage. Such difficulties include the disruption a first child can bring, which is so often a crunch point in a marriage, and the current lockdown crisis, which has understandably exacerbated stress in some relationships. Indeed, lawyers report an increase in divorce inquiries of over 40% at present. The last solution offered by the Government for this should be a quick, spur-of-the-moment escape route This Bill is not focused on helping to keep marriages and families together; it does exactly the opposite. That is why new clause 1 is so important, and I am also minded to test the will of the Committee on it. New clause 1 would ensure increased funding for relationship counselling and new support for couples where an application for divorce has been made to a court. The availability of marriage support services in this country is wholly inadequate and requires substantially greater Government investment. This is no doubt one of the reasons why we have one of the highest rates of relationship breakdown in the western world It was encouraging that, in the last Budget, the Chancellor committed £2.5 million towards this, but much more is needed. Importantly, it is needed for less well-off couples, who cannot afford the private relationships counselling that better-off people can afford. The Government say that they want to remove conflict flashpoints and reduce areas of conflict in the divorce process. Improved relationship support and counselling would help achieve that. The Bill should have focused on it, and new clause 1 will amend this omission. I was encouraged by the support from those in many parts of the House for this on Second Reading.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Fiona Claire Bruce (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman. Some excellent marriage counselling and, indeed, pre-marriage courses are supplied through church organisations. They are very popular, and I personally think it would be marvellous to see a lot more of them and to see some Government-funded support for them Counsellors help parties to understand the implications of what marriage means and, when difficulties occur, of what splitting up would mean for them, their children, and their wider families. They help people to consider what a split will involve practically, regarding contact arrangements and finances, and whether the option of staying together might be something that they could look at. Counsellors give people tools to help work through the problems, since they may not have had a role model to copy in earlier life. Critically, if the divorce goes ahead, such help can assist a couple to navigate their future relationship in a way that is best for the future wellbeing of their children, and that will, hopefully, foster continued co-operation and constructive communication, while avoiding, or at least minimising, unnecessary acrimony and relationship acidity over the many years—often decades—to come, for the benefit of all involved. It might help people who receive such counselling to know two interesting facts. First, in a study that involved more than 1,500 people, Professor Janet Walker found that two years on from a divorce, many people wished they had been warned beforehand of the harsh realities of life after separation, and said that if they had been forewarned, they might have sought reconciliation. Another piece of research from the US in the early 2000s found that people who are unhappy in their marriage are more likely to be happier five years later if they do not divorce than if they do.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Other
John Henry Hayes (Conservative, Centre-right): Of course what the hon. Gentleman says is entirely reasonable—that where there is no fault it is right that that should be acknowledged. Where there is fault, should that be acknowledged, or ignored or concealed, or what?
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrea Jacqueline Leadsom (Conservative, Centre-right): What does the hon. Gentleman make of the surveys that show that up to 50% of people who divorce come to regret it? Does he think that they are merely deluded, or are those surveys wrong? What is his assessment of that?
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Robert James MacGillivray Neill (Conservative, Centre-right): I am supportive of the objective, but I would like to hear the Minister’s comments on whether those are the best means of achieving it in the context of the Bill. I entirely accept what my hon. Friend says about the objective, and he and I share views on a number of issues. I would prefer to see the Bill pass cleanly and then to work constructively with the Government to find means of giving that sort of support, because there are other methods that I think could be used to do that. However, I take on board the importance of the point he makes Against that background, it is important that we seek to minimise conflict and that we face the fact that, however much we might wish it were otherwise, a bond that is no longer meaningful to a couple is not best served by forcing them together. That is neither socially desirable nor just; nor is it Christian or ethical in terms of any faith.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Fiona Claire Bruce (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend used the phrase "the horse has bolted" in reference to the time the petition is initiated. In fact, in recent years tens of thousands of petitions have been abandoned after being lodged at court; the marriages have remained intact. Is not that something we should celebrate and encourage?
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Mixed Topics
Andrea Jacqueline Leadsom (Conservative, Centre-right): Further to the statistic that up to 50% of people said they regretted divorcing, the reasons they gave were things like they felt they still loved their partner and that they missed their partner, so for all the huge number of comments that it is all financial, it is very genuinely emotions.
Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2020-06-17
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Robert Chope (Conservative, Centre-right): This is a very emotional subject, and we ignore that at our peril The Bill and the lack of response by the Government to the criticisms that were made on Second Reading lead me to believe that the Government do not really accept the important role that family life has to play in maintaining social cohesion in this country, with the institution of marriage at its heart. The Government almost seem to be venturing down the same route as those who support cultural Marxism. Are the Government inadvertently collaborators with cultural Marxism in seeking to undermine nuclear families In the opening speech on Second Reading, the Lord Chancellor said that "it is often too late to save a marriage, once the legal process of divorce has started."—[Official Report, 8 June 2020; Vol. 677, c. 95.] but he sought to avoid the concerns of the Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) about access to free counselling for those with marriage difficulties, and he cited the Department for Work and Pensions programme of £39 million on reducing parental conflict as the solution.