argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Education and Adoption Bill — House of Commons, 2016-02-23
Topic: Education
Nicholas Dakin (Labour, Centre-left): There is absolutely no confusion. We are just arguing that, whatever title there is above the door to the school—academy, free school, maintained school, university technical college or whatever—the same rules should apply, and all those rules should recognise the importance and the role of parents Labour believes that all schools should be treated equally. There should not be preferential treatment of schools that are academies compared with maintained schools when either are failing or coasting. Academies that are failing should have no more rights than maintained schools that are failing. There should be a level playing field for children, parents and communities, whatever the structure of the school. Labour believes that a partnership with parents is key to a strong education system, which is why we continue to argue that when their child’s school is to academise or the academy’s sponsor is to be changed, parents should be consulted Lords amendment 1 agreed to. Lords amendments 2 to 6 agreed to. After Clause 12 Amendment (a) proposed to Lords amendment 7.— (Nic Dakin.) Question put, That the amendment be made.
Defence and National Security (EU) — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: International Affairs
Daniel Stephen Zeichner (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister recently told us that he was "in no doubt that for Britain the European question is not just a matter of economic security, but of national security too" Was he right or wrong?
Defence and National Security (EU) — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: International Affairs
Matthew Toby Perkins (Labour, Centre-left): I am glad to hear the Minister give his support to what the Prime Minister said about European co-operation. On that note, will he describe a single way in which less co-operation with our EU partners is going to increase our national security?
Military Assistance (Ukraine) — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: International Affairs
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): I am sure that the first aid kits are very welcome in Ukraine, but if we are serious about supporting Ukraine, which is under such pressure from the pernicious regime of President Putin in Russia, surely we should be doing much more visible work for it. For instance, we could tighten the sanctions on Russia. That is what it does not like and what has proven to be successful. We should tighten the sanctions week by week, month by month.
Military Assistance (Ukraine) — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: International Affairs
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): Ukraine has been on the frontline of the expansionist agenda of Putin’s Russia, but it is not alone in that in eastern Europe. What assistance is the United Kingdom giving through NATO and the European Union to a number of countries, particularly the Baltic states, to combat the expansionism they face from Russia?
Daesh — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: International Affairs
Tulip Rizwana Siddiq (Labour, Centre-left): A major contributor to Daesh activities and capabilities on the ground is the foreign funding that it receives. Will the Secretary of State outline what measures the UK is taking to curb the foreign funding that Islamist groups such as Daesh receive? In particular, what pressure is he putting on Saudi Arabia and Qatar?
Successor Submarines — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Labor
Questions: What assessment he has made of the effect on UK security and the economy of building four Successor ballistic missile submarines for the nuclear deterrent; and if he will make a statement.
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister agree that the issue is about not just the number of jobs involved in the Successor programme, but the high-skill nature of those jobs? Despite ill-informed comments from my own party at the weekend with regard to those jobs, does he also agree that we cannot simply turn them on and off like a tap when we need them?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Education
Questions: I am sure the Minister will know that this year we are proud to mark the centenary of the Porton Down defence laboratory in my constituency. May I invite him to commend the work of Jonathan Lyle and his team, and to speculate on the challenges they may face in the next 100 years?; The Brimstone missiles currently being dropped in Syria are estimated to cost in the region of £150,000 each. Given such a massive financial commitment, will the Minister assure the House that the costs of this campaign are being monitored and that a similar financial contribution will be made towards rebuilding Syria?; Cadet units across the country are keen to engage in target rifle shooting, and yet the rules surrounding transportation of rifles and ammunition make such participation all but impossible for schools and cadet units. Will the Secretary of State meet me and representatives of the National Rifle Association to discuss how we can get around those very difficult rules in a practical and safe manner?
Conor Patrick McGinn (Labour, Centre-left): Commando Joe’s works in more than 500 schools across the country, placing veterans in classrooms to share skills and experiences with young people. Despite robust evidence of the success of its work, its Government funding is due to end in March this year, placing the organisation in jeopardy. Will the Secretary of State take representations on that and look at what can be done to allow this hugely important work to continue?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Questions: I am sure the Minister will know that this year we are proud to mark the centenary of the Porton Down defence laboratory in my constituency. May I invite him to commend the work of Jonathan Lyle and his team, and to speculate on the challenges they may face in the next 100 years?; The Brimstone missiles currently being dropped in Syria are estimated to cost in the region of £150,000 each. Given such a massive financial commitment, will the Minister assure the House that the costs of this campaign are being monitored and that a similar financial contribution will be made towards rebuilding Syria?; Cadet units across the country are keen to engage in target rifle shooting, and yet the rules surrounding transportation of rifles and ammunition make such participation all but impossible for schools and cadet units. Will the Secretary of State meet me and representatives of the National Rifle Association to discuss how we can get around those very difficult rules in a practical and safe manner?; Does the Secretary of State agree that any moves to weaken our commitment to an independent nuclear deterrent or to our leading role in NATO will make us less safe?; The armed forces are facing serious personnel shortages in some of the most crucial specialist trades, including nuclear engineers and flight technicians. Given that a great deal of the expertise is in the Ministry of Defence’s civilian workforce, which the Government plan to cut by 30%, will the Minister explain how the Government plan to ensure that operational capabilities are protected when those cuts go ahead?; Will the Secretary of State explain what steps the Ministry of Defence is taking to release surplus land for housing? Will he also explain what progress the MOD has made in selling or renting the fire control centre at Waterbeach?; Can my right hon. Friend set out what support his Department is offering to soldiers and veterans who are still subject to legal claims purporting to relate to incidents that took place during the Iraq war?
Tom Blenkinsop (Labour, Centre-left): Dalzell plate mill, Clydebridge quenching mill, the heavy sections at Scunthorpe and also Sheffield Forgemasters—the Secretary of State rightly said that the Government’s position is to maintain an independent nuclear deterrent, but will it be using British steel?
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Stephen Nathan Kinnock (Labour, Centre-left): I assure the Minister that the people of my constituency are listening carefully to what is being said today. I also assure her that there is palpable anger and frustration among my constituents. The claimed action on energy has still not been implemented. The claimed action on procurement amounts to so-called open advertising, while Hinkley Point has no British steel. The Government use the EU as an excuse for delay, while being China’s chief cheerleader in Europe Is it not clear to the Minister that urgent action to sustain a steel industry in Britain is of the highest national priority? No more excuses, dodges or delays. Will the Government confirm here and now that they will not support market economy status for China? Will the Government immediately establish a strong, long-term steel strategy with Tata and the unions? If they do that, there is a future; if they do not, there will be a wasteland.
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Labor
Jessica Elizabeth Morden (Labour, Centre-left): The job losses that have been announced today are a huge blow to communities across south Wales. Workers in Llanwern in my constituency are directly affected, as are the workers who were seconded to Port Talbot when the hot strip mill in Newport was mothballed last year. We are thinking of those workers today. Steelworkers have made huge sacrifices over the years and have done everything they can to help the company during these particularly tough times. Can the Government say, with hand on heart, that they have done the same? Despite what the Minister has said today, the industry and the unions say that the action has been far too slow.
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Macroeconomics
Adrian Edward Bailey (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister owned up to the failure to implement reform of business rates as part of the toxic package that the steel industry is confronting. Will she examine that issue and provide assurances that in advance of next year’s business rates proposals, the Government will consider putting in place a special package to give some relief to this beleaguered industry?
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Foreign Trade
Anna Catherine Turley (Labour, Centre-left): The people of Redcar and Teesside are still dealing with the repercussions of the tragedy of the loss of our steel-making facilities and our 175-year history of steel making. They will send their solidarity and their thoughts to the people of Port Talbot, Llanwern and other areas that have lost their jobs in the past few days The Minister has again refused today to acknowledge the impact that market economy status for China will have—it will destroy the future of British steel making because, in a sense, it will facilitate Chinese dumping. She says she has sorted that and ticked the box, but that is not the case. I urge her to think again about market economy status for China.
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Foreign Trade
Patrick Bosco McFadden (Labour, Centre-left): It is many years since the steelworks in my constituency closed. Some would say that the local economy has never fully recovered. My constituents therefore understand well the fear and worry that will exist in the community in south Wales and elsewhere in the country after the news today. Will the Minister be clear with the House on exactly where the Government stand on the question of market economy status for China and how it relates to anti-dumping rules?
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Labor
Christina Elizabeth Rees (Labour, Centre-left): Job losses at Port Talbot and Trostre are devastating for the people and communities in south-west Wales. Many of my constituents in Neath who work at Port Talbot and Trostre will suffer. I endorse the words of my hon. Friend the Member for Aberavon (Stephen Kinnock) and ask again what urgent action the Government will take to help, apart from offering warm words.
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Macroeconomics
Nicholas Desmond John Smith (Labour, Centre-left): May I press the Minister? Will the Treasury find a way to provide the extra resources to the Welsh Government to reduce business rates at Tata? That would help to keep steel alive in south Wales.
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Foreign Trade
Mark Richard Tami (Labour, Centre-left): Although the measures announced by the Government are welcome, they are very limited. Does the Minister not accept that unless we tackle the issue of Chinese dumping, the whole future of the whole UK industry is at threat, and that the clock is ticking—we do not have much time left?
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Paul Christopher Blomfield (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister talks tough on procurement. Why, then, under the terms of the contract struck between this Government and EDF, are UK companies capable of producing the large forgings for the Hinkley Point reactor not being given the opportunity even to tender for the work? What independent evaluation has her Department undertaken of EDF’s assertion that there are no UK companies with the relevant experience?
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Angela Christine Smith (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister provided details of the updated procurement guidance and, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) pointed out, said that there was no excuse not to buy and every reason to buy British steel. Of course, the ability for the industry to do so is constrained by the fact that its range of capabilities has been lost and limited to a great degree over the last few decades. In other words, British steel does not make the range of components and specialised range of steel products that it did years ago. What, then, are the Government going to do to support the industry, as we propose with Forgemasters, to secure investment and develop a new range of capabilities? We will not see high UK content in our infrastructure projects until that issue is addressed.
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Foreign Trade
Tom Blenkinsop (Labour, Centre-left): Before Christmas, the OECD held a meeting about steel that the Chinese delegation refused to attend. Obviously, every other country’s representatives wanted to talk specifically about Chinese dumping What is the Government’s position on Chinese market economy status? Are they in favour of it, whether inside or outside the European Union, and whether or not China signs up to the emissions trading system agreement that was signed in Paris? Will the Minister please tell us how on earth we will have a manufacturing sector at all by the autumn—when the European Union will make a decision on MES—if China is allowed to dump with such abandon in the absence of any proper control, whether in this place or in the European Union?
Steel Sector — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Macroeconomics
Andrew John Gwynne (Labour, Centre-left): The Minister cannot have it both ways. Eventually, as surely as night follows day, global consumption will increase, demand will increase, and the price of steel will increase. What assessment has the Department made of the long-term impact, not only on UK competitiveness but on our own domestic economic strategy, of this vital industry being so badly depleted?
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Margaret Greenwood (Labour, Centre-left): Underground coal gasification is an issue of major concern in my constituency, because Cluff Natural Resources has been granted a licence for the Dee estuary, which runs along the side of the constituency. In the Secretary of State’s speech of 18 November she announced the Government’s welcome intention to close coal by 2025 and restrict its use by 2023, commenting that coal is the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, damages air quality and is simply not sustainable in the longer term. As the Government are proposing—
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Minister accept that only 2.5% of world energy is created by nuclear power? If that were to rise to 15%, uranium ore would run out within 10 years. Given that 80% of fossil fuels cannot be exploited without breaching our climate change targets, does she accept that she is simply not doing enough on renewables?
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Secretary of State accept that the reason we have the massive deflation in oil prices, other than Saudi over-consumption, is fracking? The latest evidence shows that 5% of methane from fracking goes into the atmosphere, and methane is 83% worse than carbon dioxide in effecting climate change. Will she therefore hold negotiations with the United States about reducing this methane emission and put the brakes on fracking, so that we can actually lift the price of oil and have a more sustainable future?
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Lisa Eva Nandy (Labour, Centre-left): North sea oil and gas production has helped us to fund our public services, such as the national health service, through the taxes it has generated which are worth hundreds of billions of pounds. It has improved our national security by reducing our dependence on imports from other countries. It has bettered our energy security by providing a reliable supply of gas and oil, fuels that will continue to play an important role in our energy mix, particularly for heating and transport, as we become a lower carbon economy. Crucially, the North sea also sustains hundreds of thousands of skilled jobs in Scotland and the north-east of England and in world-class supply chain businesses right across the country For these reasons there has been a cross-party consensus for some considerable time that we should do everything we can to protect those jobs and to continue to maximise investment in our North sea oil and gas industry. The incredibly tough economic conditions faced by businesses operating in the waters off our shores because of the major fall in the price of oil only underlines the need for parties across this House to work together to get on and implement the recommendations of the independent review produced by Sir Ian Wood.
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Lisa Eva Nandy (Labour, Centre-left): Perhaps I can help the hon. Gentleman with that, as it is one of the things that he obviously struggles to understand. As we move towards a clean economy—there is widespread agreement in all parts of the House that that is a journey we must take—we need to think, too, about where we get our energy from in the short to medium term. There is no question about this—it is a fact that we will need to rely on oil and gas in the short to medium term. Because of that, the question that we face on all sides of the House is whether we import that oil and gas or generate our own Our view is that this transition must be made with due care and attention to the jobs, skills and investment we need in this country. It must also be made with due care for our environment, our health and our safety. That is a difficult thing to achieve. I very much welcome the fact that we are having this debate, but it seems to me that pitting the interests of the industry we currently have in the North sea against our interests in transitioning to a clean economy will not get us very far at all.
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Geraint Richard Davies (Labour, Centre-left): Does my hon. Friend therefore agree that, with regard to the need to convert to renewables in the long run, one of the dangers of a very low oil price, other than restricting margins in the oil industry, is crowding out investment in renewables, and that therefore the cost-effectiveness of investing in renewables now should not be engaged by the current spot price of oil in the marketplace?
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Lisa Eva Nandy (Labour, Centre-left): My hon. Friend has made several comments, some of which I agree with and some of which I do not, but I think he is right to point out the very real problems created by the falling oil price, such as the economic conditions faced by businesses currently operating in the North sea. It is clearly in our national interests to move forward with the recommendations made by Sir Ian Wood. That is why we must move ahead with his proposals to establish the independence of the new Oil and Gas Authority, and why we support the Government’s steps to progress that plan. As the North sea enters a new, mature phase and as investment flows into decommissioning offshore installations, I hope that Ministers will do everything in their power to ensure that that work is completed using the skills and expertise held by workers in the yards of Fife and the north-east of England.
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Lisa Eva Nandy (Labour, Centre-left): I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that question, which the Secretary of State will have heard. I am sure that either she or the Minister of State will attempt to respond to it later in the debate It is clear that there are still substantial remaining oil and gas reserves in the North sea, and future investment must absolutely not be limited to decommissioning activities. We remain the second largest producer of oil in Europe, after Norway. There are 300 fields currently in production, and it has been estimated that as many as 20 billion barrels of oil and gas remain to be exploited in UK waters. Much of that is understood to be in hundreds of small and marginal fields, which are much more difficult and expensive to exploit, so it is important that the newly independent Oil and Gas Authority is able to maximise investment in those fields if we are to seize that potential. That will require strong powers to encourage collaboration within the industry, resolve disputes between firms, and drive greater efficiencies to make further extraction viable, including consideration of costs.
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Lisa Eva Nandy (Labour, Centre-left): Yes, I agree. In particular, the ripple effect of what we do now in relation to North sea oil and gas will be felt not just directly by the workforce employed there, but by the UK workforce as a whole and around the world The Wood review also noted that carbon capture and storage has the potential to be of huge benefit.
Energy Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-18
Topic: Energy
Lisa Eva Nandy (Labour, Centre-left): We were keen to explore the future potential for the North sea for two reasons, one of which is the potential for the oil price to rise in future. While we have a rigged infrastructure worth a substantial amount of money still standing there, now is the time that we ought to explore the use to which we could put that infrastructure in the short term while trying to predict longer-term trends The fourth recommendation in the Wood review was that the Government need to work with industry to develop strategies in different areas, including for carbon capture and storage. Lord Deben, one of the Government’s own chief advisers on energy policy, argued that "it would be very odd to produce legislation that did not allow specifically for the transportation and storage of greenhouse gases."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 7 September 2015; Vol. 764, c. 1227.] Lord Oxburgh, the former head of Shell, said: "We need some kind of strategic framework within which private industry can operate in the CCS area."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 19 October 2015; Vol. 765, c. 483.] They are absolutely right. Some of the infrastructure in the North sea could be used to create an entirely new maritime industry with very many new jobs. This would also help us to realise the commitments on climate change that the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State recently agreed, rightly, at the Paris summit.