argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Online Disinformation — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Liam Dominic Byrne (Labour, Centre-left): We would have a world-class regime for shutting down fake news and disinformation if we had courts that were actually accessible in the fight against misbehaviour by big tech. The breakthrough in the Court of Appeal yesterday, in the case of Richard Lloyd, shows just how hard it is to bring to account big tech firms, like Google, that have clearly misbehaved. So when the Minister brings the online harms Bill to the House—he might tell us when he expects that to happen—will he look again at the proposals that we will table in Committee to make it far easier to bring class actions against some of the biggest firms on earth? He has the chance to level the legal playing field against big tech; will he tell the House that he is determined to seize it?
Online Abuse — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Technology
Tom Watson (Labour, Centre-left): Good morning, Mr Speaker. May I welcome the Secretary of State to her new role and, on behalf of my team, welcome her team to their new roles too? The cyber-security fund forms part of this Government’s approach to combating harmful online activity, but serious doubts have been raised about the fund’s management. Given the concern, can the Minister or the Secretary of State confirm today whether Hacker House is a UK-based company?
Free TV Licences: Over-75s — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Rachael Helen Maskell (Labour, Centre-left): Promises matter, and people who are elderly, lonely and housebound are not interested in squabbling in this place or in excuses—they want that promise honoured and their free TV licence. So will the Secretary of State say why she made a promise at the election, why she is letting down older people across the country and what she is going to do about it?
Free TV Licences: Over-75s — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Mary Elizabeth Twist (Labour, Centre-left): We are in the midst of a loneliness epidemic, and for many older people television is their main source of company. For those who are housebound or live on their own, it is a window to the wider world. There are 5,170 households in my constituency who look set to lose their free TV licences, which they were promised by the Government at the last election. Does the Minister agree that you cannot means test for social isolation?
Topical Questions — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Catherine Jane Smith (Labour, Centre-left): Given that spending on youth work has fallen by £880 million since 2010, I was very interested in the Government’s announcement this week, but note that it is just £50 million a year in revenue for the sector. Given that at least 760 youth centres have closed their doors and 14,500 youth and community workers have lost their jobs since 2010, does the Secretary of State think that the announcement of just 60 new youth centres really cuts it?
EU (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act: Implementation — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Thangam Elizabeth Rachel Debbonaire (Labour, Centre-left): Notwithstanding all that, I am going to ask the Attorney General a nice yes-no question. The Act requires the Prime Minister to ask for an extension unless Parliament has agreed a withdrawal agreement or agreed to leave without one, so will the Attorney General confirm that, if Parliament has not done either of those things, the Prime Minister would be acting unlawfully if he nevertheless took us out of the EU on 31 October? Yes or no?
EU (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act: Implementation — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Nicklaus Thomas-Symonds (Labour, Centre-left): I have the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019 in front of me, so perhaps the Attorney General can confirm his interpretation of it. The Act is clear that, if this House has not approved a deal or if it has not approved leaving with no deal, the Prime Minister "must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension" in the terms set out in the Act. Will the Attorney General confirm that that is what this Act of Parliament requires?
EU (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act: Implementation — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Nicklaus Thomas-Symonds (Labour, Centre-left): I am afraid that confirmation is required from the Attorney General. Let me explain why. We keep being told that the Government will comply with the law, yet the Prime Minister goes around saying that he would rather be dead in a ditch than apply for the extension that he is required to seek under the Act. Does the Attorney General not realise that the Government’s ambiguous position towards the rule of law is damaging our justice system, our society and our international standing? Why does the Attorney General just stand by and let that happen?
Prorogation: Supreme Court Judgment — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implications for Government policy of the Supreme Court judgment of 24 September 2019 on the Prorogation of Parliament.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implications for Government policy of the Supreme Court judgment of 24 September 2019 on the Prorogation of Parliament.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implications for Government policy of the Supreme Court judgment of 24 September 2019 on the Prorogation of Parliament.
Rachael Helen Maskell (Labour, Centre-left): In the light of the Supreme Court’s judgment and the vital role it identified for this House of scrutinising the Executive, what discussions is the Attorney General having with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that we have sufficient time to discuss the proposals the Prime Minister is due to bring forward? How much time will we actually have to debate them?
Prorogation: Supreme Court Judgment — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Government Operations
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implications for Government policy of the Supreme Court judgment of 24 September 2019 on the Prorogation of Parliament.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implications for Government policy of the Supreme Court judgment of 24 September 2019 on the Prorogation of Parliament.; What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implications for Government policy of the Supreme Court judgment of 24 September 2019 on the Prorogation of Parliament.
Joanna Meriel Stevens (Labour, Centre-left): Eight days ago, the Attorney General told the House, in response to a question from the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry), that he would consider disclosure of his legal advice on the unlawful Prorogation of Parliament. Can he now confirm that he will do the right thing and release his advice before Parliament is prorogued next week?
Sexual Offences: Prosecution — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: What recent discussions he has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions on ensuring more effective prosecutions of cases involving rape and other sexual offences.; What recent discussions he has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions on ensuring more effective prosecutions of cases involving rape and other sexual offences.; What recent discussions he has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions on ensuring more effective prosecutions of cases involving rape and other sexual offences.
Ruth Lorraine Jones (Labour, Centre-left): I am alarmed to hear that police forces across the country are demanding highly personal records and data, including health, school and college records and even counselling notes, from potential rape victims before pressing ahead with their cases. Campaigners have long warned that victims will be put off going to the police by that intrusion into their lives. Can the Solicitor General outline what he is doing to combat that?
No-deal Brexit: Priorities — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Questions: What recent assessment he has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU without a deal on the priorities for his office.
Christopher John Bryant (Labour, Centre-left): May I ask about extradition? Obviously we in this country rely on being able to extradite people from other countries in Europe to face justice in this country. We have relied on the European arrest warrant but, as I understand it, four or five countries in the European Union have now stated categorically that, if there is no deal, they will not extradite to the UK. How will we make sure that we get people to face justice in this country?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Hilary James Benn (Labour, Centre-left): For the last three years, it has been Government policy that border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic after Brexit would not include checks and controls—that is enshrined in UK law—but now the Prime Minister has announced that there will be customs checks in Northern Ireland. [Interruption.] Those are the words he used. He has also entertained the possibility that Northern Ireland will never enter the regulatory zone of which he speaks because, if the Assembly and the Executive do not agree to do so, it will not happen. As a result, he has abandoned that commitment and risks a return to a hard border. How is that consistent with the joint declaration of 2017 signed by his predecessor, with the Good Friday agreement and with the peace and stability in Northern Ireland that has been so hard won?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Labor
Yvette Cooper (Labour, Centre-left): Will the Prime Minister agree to give evidence on this to the Liaison Committee before the European Council? Will he also confirm that he is proposing to remove the provisions in article 4 of annex 4 to the protocol, in particular the commitment not to reduce fundamental rights at work—occupational health and safety, fair working conditions and employment standards? Will he confirm that, far from increasing workers’ rights and the protection of those rights as many Labour Members have urged him to do, he is in fact proposing to reduce that protection and make it easier for Conservative Governments to do what they have always done, and cut workers’ rights?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Benjamin Peter James Bradshaw (Labour, Centre-left): Breaking the Good Friday agreement, putting at risk 20 years of peace, creating two new hard borders and a smugglers’ paradise in Northern Ireland, and scrapping all the labour regulations, environmental standards and other standards in the rest of the United Kingdom: this is nothing like what the Prime Minister peddled to the voters in 2016, is it? So why is he scared of sending it back to the people for their consent in a referendum?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Christian John Patrick Matheson (Labour, Centre-left): Can the Prime Minister not accept that a customs post that is sited 20 miles away from a border still represents a hard border and therefore goes against the Good Friday agreement? Why is he willing to prioritise Brexit against the Good Friday agreement?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
George Edward Howarth (Labour, Centre-left): As a former Northern Ireland Minister, I am all too painfully aware of how fragile the arrangements are. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton South East (Mr McFadden) pointed out, the Prime Minister’s proposals are all contingent on their periodic renewal by the Executive and Assembly. Does he not realise that that will only add to the fragility of the political situation that already exists in Northern Ireland? Is there not a case to consider, given particularly that the Executive and Assembly are not even up and running, for putting the case directly to the people of Northern Ireland in the form of a referendum, to see what they think about it?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Alison McGovern (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister said some moments ago that the history of referendums in this country was not good, but may I remind him that by 71% the Good Friday agreement was passed by a referendum I return the Prime Minister to the detail of his statement today. On page 3, he refers to the regulatory zone for Northern Ireland, and he says that, "the Assembly will vote again every four years—and if consent were withheld, these arrangements would then lapse after one year." Lapse back to what?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Grahame Mark Morris (Labour, Centre-left): Over a week ago the Prime Minister told the House, in response to a question by my good and hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Gloria De Piero), that he would publish a new EU withdrawal Bill within days. That is important, because it could form the basis, with amendments, to move forward and break the deadlock—amendments on workers’ rights, health and safety and environmental standards. Will the Prime Minister honour that commitment and publish the Bill?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Barry John Sheerman (Labour, Centre-left): Does the Prime Minister agree that most people in this country are not extreme remainers or extreme Brexiteers? Surely it is his job, and the job of the House now, to look at a deal. What we have heard today is a bit of a deal, but we need a full look. Perhaps we should restart the cross-party discussion so that he can evade the conclusion that he has to break the law and leave without a deal. Can we restart sensible negotiations?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Stephen John Doughty (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister has spoken a number of times about consent, but I urge him, particularly as the only representative here in the House at the moment speaking for Northern Ireland is the hon. Member for North Down (Lady Hermon), to listen very carefully to what she said. He talks about consent, but it is clear this morning that there is not consent from many of the other parties in Northern Ireland and many people across the different communities, nor from the business community nor from Dublin and the Irish Government. I urge him to listen very carefully to that There is a simple way through this, which is to put a credible deal back to the people, including the people of Northern Ireland, for a confirmatory vote. I urge the Prime Minister to look at that closely. Will he confirm how his proposals are in line with section 10(2) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, because I do not believe that they are?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Foreign Trade
David George Hanson (Labour, Centre-left): Could the Prime Minister genuinely help me? Paragraph 9 of his explanatory note says that "traders moving goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland would need… A new notification requirement" regarding "the nature of the goods in the consignment… people sending (exporting) and receiving (importing) the goods… where the goods will depart and arrive" and that these arrangements will not be effective until the transition period is completed As the hon. Member for North Down (Lady Hermon) said, that is effectively a second border. Can the Prime Minister tell the House how many of those transactions he anticipates each year, and what the cost would be to businesses and to the Government in establishing that system?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Peter John Kyle (Labour, Centre-left): From the outset of negotiations, the British Government have, understandably, had their red lines. They are long-standing and unchangeable red lines. It is understandable also that our negotiating partners in the EU have their red lines, which they have stuck to rigidly throughout. Today and last night, the Irish Taoiseach has said that the proposals the Prime Minister has laid before the House today break those red lines and are unacceptable. In the words of the Taoiseach, "It’s a non-starter." Why has the Prime Minister brought before the House proposals that are simply unacceptable to the EU? They are breaking the red lines that the EU has had from the outset. If the EU had done the same to us, he would be using the most outrageous language against it, yet he has brought something here that is completely unacceptable from the outset. Why?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Ann Clwyd (Labour, Centre-left): As the Prime Minister has repeatedly demonstrated this morning, the information about the political declaration is very vague indeed. It would not protect jobs, rights or security, and does not seek to address the major reasons why Opposition Members opposed the deal put forward three times by the previous Prime Minister. Will this Prime Minister tell us how he thinks the European Parliament will react to his proposals? Has he had any contact with those at the European Parliament? Has he had any indication as to how they are feeling?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Foreign Trade
Katherine Anne Green (Labour, Centre-left): Manufacturers in my constituency operate an integrated trading model, whereby they ship goods directly from Manchester to the Republic of Ireland for distribution across the whole of the island of Ireland. Can the Prime Minister explain to me how the deal he is proposing now offers them more certainty, fewer burdens and less cost both than they have now and than they would have had under the backstop?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Foreign Trade
Stephen Creswell Timms (Labour, Centre-left): In the referendum, the right hon. Gentleman held out the prospect of frictionless trade with the European Union. I think he has acknowledged that, whatever else one says about the proposals, they would not result in frictionless trade. For what reasons has it not been possible to deliver what was promised?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Paul John Sweeney (Labour, Centre-left): From listening to today’s proceedings, it increasingly seems to me that this is an internal debate within the Conservative party, rather than a meaningful attempt at international diplomacy. [Interruption.] I hear the outcry from the Treasury Bench, but the reality is that the Irish Deputy Prime Minister, Simon Coveney, said this morning that Ireland "cannot possibly" support the Prime Minister’s proposals and that the UK should come back with something "fit for purpose". Elaborating on that, he said: "We cannot support any proposal that suggests that one party or indeed a minority in Northern Ireland could make the decision for the majority in terms of how these proposals would be implemented" If this plan is to be workable, how will the Prime Minister respond to that challenge?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Chinyelu Susan Onwurah (Labour, Centre-left): But the Prime Minister must recognise that this deal manages to put two borders on or around the island of Ireland while at the same time significantly undermining the north-east manufacturing and exporting economy, and leaving our NHS and our gorgeous landscape open to the depredations of American big business. Is this not just an attempt to put the blame for this ongoing Brexit shambles anywhere but where it belongs—with the Prime Minister?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Neil Coyle (Labour, Centre-left): The Prime Minister has recently admitted that it was wrong to cut our police so much that nine in 10 crimes have been going unpunished, his Government are beginning to admit the massive faults with universal credit and he has admitted the deep damage to the NHS. This unusual honesty is refreshing, so when will he get equally honest about Brexit and admit that these plans would leave our country worse off and less secure, that they risk the very future of the United Kingdom and that as such they should never—and can never—be described as being in our national interest?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Matthew Thomas Pennycook (Labour, Centre-left): As with the Malthouse compromise and the Brady amendment, it is difficult to look at these proposals and not conclude that those on the Government Benches are almost exclusively talking to themselves. But taking the proposals at face value, does the Prime Minister accept that even if they do form the basis—however unlikely—for a deal, there is no way that the arrangements set out in this new protocol can be put in place within 14 months, so the logic of what he is proposing is an extension to the transition period beyond December 2020, with all the financial implications that that entails?
Brexit Negotiations — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: International Affairs
Christopher Paul Farrelly (Labour, Centre-left): The reality is that, in supporting this hotch-potch of proposals, the absent Democratic Unionist party has stood on its head as regards accepting a regulatory border down the Irish sea, and this can only be because the looming no deal from the Prime Minister would be a disaster for Northern Ireland, which voted to remain. So can I ask the Prime Minister: is it not time that the people of Northern Ireland, as well as the rest of the UK, were given a further vote with a much simpler option on the ballot paper, of remaining in the customs union and the single market? What is the Prime Minister afraid of in opposing this suggestion?
Women’s Mental Health — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Jeffrey Smith (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman made an important point about the reduction in funding for local authorities. When it comes to trying to provide holistic support to the family and mother, does he share my regret at the closure of so many hundreds of Sure Start centres since 2010?
Women’s Mental Health — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Jeffrey Smith (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is making an important point, but, with the greatest respect, West Sussex did not have the kind of cuts to its local authority funding that many more impoverished areas such as Manchester and other big northern cities did. He is right that it is not just about bricks and mortar: it is the support services that were also cut that have had the greatest impact on young families in those areas.
Women’s Mental Health — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Social Welfare
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): The hon. Gentleman is making the fundamental mistake that Members on the Government Benches often do—the idea that every area in the country is the same. I am sure that there are many more looked-after children in inner cities such as Liverpool, Manchester and others—and even in Durham—than there are in his area. That comes with a cost, and the areas cannot be treated the same.
Women’s Mental Health — House of Commons, 2019-10-03
Topic: Law and Crime
Kevan David Jones (Labour, Centre-left): Does the hon. Lady agree that one of the problems that pertains particularly to women prisoners is that of short sentences, which do not give enough time for rehabilitation and over time disengage people from services outside and, in a lot of cases, from families and other support networks?