now available to you. it is fast and free. try it out and c-spanvideo.org. >> now from london prime minister's question time from the british house of commons. when parliament is in session prime minister gordon brown takes questions from the house of commons. prior to question time the house is wrapping up previous business. this is live coverage on c-span2. >> discussions with your colleagues on a range of issues. >> this has caused great concern particularly reported reduction in the number of helicopters from 28 to 34 and the government's regular assignment to monitor the effects in the long step to the private sector and hope the minister will

reassure me of that today. >> there will be no taxation of the existing service known as constituents benefits from and in particular the new helicopters introduced will have more capability and have faster response time which will be welcomed. >> questions to the prime minister. mr. reid? >> mr. speaker, before i answer the question let me make another tribute to our troops. they are working with incredibly incredible bravery with fortitude and dedication to defeat those who brought terrorism to the streets of britain. by denying them ground and air support by offering the population in afghanistan a more prosperous future. i know the house will join me in paying tribute to the seven soldiers who lost their lives since the house last met.

lance corporal deron hicks from first battalion, lance sergeant david greenhorn. from six battalion attached to third battalion of their rifles. riflemen mark marshall. from the second battalion the duke of lancaster regiment, sean dorsey. from 36 engineer regiment royal engineers, first battalion guards, lt. douglas. from first battalion scots guards, and sergeant david walker. these men of exceptional bravery are great courage and skill whose loss is deeply felt. we send our profound condolences to their families and loved ones. meeting with others in addition

to my duties in the house i thought of such duties today. >> i am sure everyone will want to associate themselves with the prime minister's comments. my prime ministers never shared -- they paid for the bailout. what will my friend give me when they give their money back that threatens our services and we will not ever squander this investment on a halfback public share offer. >> we have imposed a 50% national insurance tax on bank bonuses which has to be paid by everybody paying cash bonuses over the next year and we insisted on the application of the g 20 rules which means cash bonuses cannot be paid and can only be paid at a later date. we are also working for global banking levee whether we are in discussions with other countries and making progress on how that

could be administered. at the same time we are determined that the bank's payback every penny. that is an essential means by which we reduce the deficit and give price shares to the deficit would be higher and the public would be denied the money they should receive. >> can i join the prime minister in paying tribute to the seven service men who have been killed in afghanistan since last time we met, david walker and dennis bar the 0 and dime dollars and can the shaun donovan and rifle and mark marshall, david greenelaw hold and darren hicks. we are paying a high price for the operations of our undertaking in helmets but it is an essential mission and our forces and their families need to know they have the support of the whole house and the whole country in the work they are doing.

the report into the hospital has only just been published but i want to ask a couple questions before turning to other subject. hundreds of people went into that hospital with relatively straightforward ailments and ended up dying because they were mistreated, talking to the relatives of many have done is heartbreaking. though the prime minister understand that these victims will never be content with an inquiry that was conducted in private behind closed doors without any public hearings? does he understand the clamor for a public inquiry? >> let me say we understand the sadness and the sorrow of all big relatives who lost their loved ones in the hospital trust and we know that every single one of those cases where relatives have doubts or questions are now being investigated as individual cases and i understand there are 300

cases being investigated and everyone of these families deserve to have the answers that are necessary. that is the first problem of inquiry being done. the second form of inquiry is the kind that as secretary of state, will report in the few minutes and continue its work under regulation and supervision of foundation hospitals particularly of this hospital. what happened was completely unacceptable. what happened was a management failure and when it comes to accident and emergency i am shocked not only to read the stories but to find where there should have been four consultants there will only one and where there should have been 55 nurses there were only 37. this was a failure in management. i am grateful to the secretary for health with a series of recommendations including a recommendation that where management fails, we would be able to strike off those who

were not acceptable. >> it wasn't one of the tragedies of stafford. not just bad management but bad clinical practice and over adherence to processes year after year, to the deaths at the hospital were too high end of line from 2005 yet the health care admissions' the investigating in 2008. isn't it clear the structure of primary care trust and the health care commission didn't bring this to light early enough? does the prime minister agree we need a better way of publishing results and patient outcomes in the hospital and we need openness, clarity and transparency to stop this happening again? >> but he should recognize the action we have already taken. inequality test for foundation trust, new requirement of the prevalent by the medical director, care quality commission that reviews are under way. we can remove the trust court

easily. there is only an early warning system in place. these have all been done already but at the same time the secretary of state will announce later today there will be an inquiry into mortality ratios on whether that is the best way of judging whether a hospital is being successful and there will be proposals about the the authorization of foundation trusts and we know there are disciplinary hearings underway. we have done everything we can to ensure that after this has been exposed, we not only investigate the individual worries of families who are affected but also learn every lesson possible so that this would not happen again and we have a statement this morning from the interim chair of the health care quality commission, we have no reason to believe there is another trust in england with problems on the scale of magnitude that existed, want to reassure people on that but also that we are constantly

tracking the situation. >> just as we need openness in the health service we need openness at the heart of government. after the -- after the extraordinary statement last night, the prime minister said this morning, quote, i would never and trust anybody to do anything other than support my chancellor. try and stand up with a straight face and tell us that is true. >> mr. speaker, it is not only correct but this is the nearest he has ever got to talking about the economy in the last few months. if you want to talk about the

economy, we can talk. >> the leader of the opposition must be heard. about wrecking of the pension system. six 24 an election with the record budget deficit and the end of session, i would ask why prime minister and chancellor are at war with each other. this is what we are told. damien mcbride -- any closer and

they will start kissing. after he said what he said unleashed the forces of hell. what does the prime minister think he said that? >> i never and trusted briefing -- when it comes to the question of the economy, can he and his party explain why they were for reducing the deficit than against reducing the deficit and no thoughts of reducing the deficit again. that is why there was never any substance from the leader of the opposition. >> this put character in the heart of the election. judge on his moral compass. why is it the moral compass always points that someone else

other than him? this is a verbatim eyewitness account from one of the journalists. the point man turned and started -- >> if we do not stop shouting i may have to bring some sort of help line myself. or worse still, it makes an extremely bad impression, this sort of noise and ranting on the british public. die appeal to the house to have some regard for the way in which we are viewed by the electorate. the house will hear the leader of the opposition. >> things got so bad that even a security guard needs protection. >> let's keep it simple. will the prime minister get to his feet and tell us he knew absolutely nothing about the

briefing against his chancellor in front of all these people who worked with him for so long after 27 minutes of the resignation, three attempts to get rid of him. get your feet and tell us he knew nothing. >> he is not doing very well. he has answered the same question three times and i have answered it. mr. speaker, i would rather be defending my chancellor then be in his position. the truth of the matter is the chancellor has been right on every issue of economic policy over the last three years and the leader of the opposition have been wrong on every occasion i have seen. if the chancellor was right why was he trying to get rid of it? the prime minister wants to talk. give him one statistic and see if he will confirm it. figures out today show that gdp

per capita is lower today than when this began. this is the first government to leave this company poorer than when it began. >> the chancellor and i can confirm there higher than in 1997. that is the question he asked and the answer he will get. the problem with the leader is not one side pacts -- ask any question about the substance of policy. he gets it wrong every time. people are taking up a long look at the conservatives. mr. speaker, they are now seeing through them. >> ms. blackburn -- i am sure members want to hear ms. blackman. >> firstly, can i add my

condolences to my hon. friends, my constituency, a very brave young man. to receive a diagnosis of cancer must be one of the most frightening things in anybody's life. nine people see specialists within two weeks. can i welcome the government's intention to build on that incredible program and make a two week goal a legal entitlement? it is reassuring for their families. >> i am grateful to my hon. friends who have taken an interest in how to progress against cancer in our country and if people get early diagnosis there is a 90% less chance of survival from breast cancer and other forms of cancer and that is why we are so keen

that everyone can see a specialist as quickly as possible and everyone can get a diagnosis as quickly as possible. that is what will save lives. i have to say the policy of having a guarantee for two weeks is a policy that got massive support throughout the country and i cannot understand why the conservative party is against these guarantees that we get to every patient in the country. if they want to show their support for the health effort they should support the guarantee for cancer care. >> i would like to add my own contentions to the family and friends of the seven great soldiers who lost their lives serving so professionally in afghanistan since the house last sack. deron hicks, sergeant david greenehow and mark marshall and

kinsmen sean and got miller's, douglas, lance sergeant david blockerwe. we owe them a debt of gratitude. last time the prime minister wheeled out his slogan of future fare for all back in 2003, just as now the poorest were paying more of their income in taxes than the richest. there's one big difference. since 2003 the gap between the poor start paying and the richest have doubled. how can he possibly call that fair? >> he has got to include the importance of tax credits. he forgets that six million families are getting child tax credits. the child benefit was worth ten times when we came into office and the child tax benefit is worth anything from 30 pound to 100 lbs. for a family of one or two which is how we have reduced child poverty in this country

and because we support the policy of tax credits we will continue to reduce child poverty in this country and parties that wish to cut child tax credits like the conservative party wants to do, will prove more children in poverty in this country which is why we oppose the policy. >> he reeled off his record but -- he ought to take a second look. what do we find on the tax break? on the height of assurance hitting people who work hard and play by the rules. justice for the many and tax breaks for the few. is the truth, mr. speaker, that given -- given what happened last time the prime minister promised a future fare for all it is a warning. >> i thought he would do better

than that. we have been dealing with tax breaks at the top including the removal of pension tax relief for those who are very wealthy and hope he will continue to support our policy. the chancellor signed an agreement which will bring a billion pounds of money back to this country but as far as helping everybody, as far as helping everybody is concerned it is our policy to help the unemployed and help people out of recession that is making the difference between poverty and people having sufficient to live on and that is because of our policies there are half a million people at work than predicted and the time of the budget and that makes the difference to poverty. >> the prime minister and the whole house joined me in condemning the kidnapping and brutal murders and the heading of two sick young men in pakistan by an extremist taliban group and what action the

government is taking to insist to the pakistan government in protecting minority groups in pakistan from taliban. >> mr. speaker, the danger that is posed by the afghan taliban as the pakistani taliban with both work from pakistan is something that becomes more obvious every day and when he refers to the murders of people in pakistan by the pakistan taliban he is referring to violent incidents that are happening every day as a result of the efforts of the taliban. we are working with the pakistani authorities so we can make inroads into the taliban that has had some success with the leadership of the afghan taliban in only the last few weeks but at the same time we will work with the pakistan security authorities and we will continue to say to the pakistani people we will help children with education. we ask you to work with us so madrasahs cannot have an evil influence on the young people of

pakistan. >> the prime minister will know that government expenditure on advertising and marketing and self-promotion went up by more than 40% last year. will he cut it out? >> we already announced government advertising budget and consultant budget. he should know that. >> mr. david clement. >> february was designated by awareness month. does he talk about -- does he attempt by the party officer the party fit for government that qualify as one of the biggest scams in history and delineation logging on to draw attention to the latest example of this? >> for a party led by the air

brush, financed from offshore. >> my constituent, stephen oliver, died in tragic and mysterious circumstances late last year. the family of steve them are very disappointed by the greek authority's failure to properly investigate his death and furthermore the british government seeming acceptance of the situation. i am now asking of the prime minister to take a personal interest in this situation and tried to get the answers to the questions the fifth family is raising. >> i, like he, is start to hear of the death of stephen oliver in october last year and i send my sincere condolences to the family.

understand in london and greece they are ready to provide advice and assistance to mr. oliver's family as appropriate for the advice on seeking further information about the circumstances of his death and i will make sure that is done and your colleagues will move further into any concerns the government may have. >> can the prime minister confirm that he condemns not only the use of false passports and criminal operation but any act of state sponsored assassination anywhere? will he drop the government plans to amend the law in universal jurisdiction which has been justified on the basis of the need to protect israel's right to view diplomatic conduct and proper intergovernmental engagement. standards for which the government is showing utter

contempt and disdain with which they did last week. >> where there are questions about the misuse of british passports, they have to be answered. there is an investigation, i would not draw immediate conclusions without seeing the evidence and it is important to see the evidence on this report before any further conclusion that made but we do not support state-sponsored terrorism in any country but the laws of international jurisdiction affect all countries not just one country. >> the prime minister famously had a tempestuous relationship with his predecessor. did he mean it literally? >> once again the conservative party can't raise the issue of policy. yesterday we had an education

statement. on monday we had a business conference and a conservative back venture gets up and question from the front bench, can't ask a question even about his own constituency. >> mr. speaker, my friends know that the whole -- continues about court company to is 80% full week distended is now mothballed and 1700 are made unemployed. let the prime minister tell the house this afternoon what his ministers are doing to help secure and whether it is the case then they are not prepared to sell this company and speak to british ministers. >> i share her a anger about what has happened and the loss of 1700 jobs in any area is

unacceptable. the loss of 1700 jobs in an area dependent on this industry for years and have a contract which would have been guaranteeing for future years is more unacceptable, something we have to look at carefully. there was a contract involving four companies that would have guaranteed the output of this plan. that contract broke down through the partners in it disagreeing about the future. i have met with people in the area about what is happening to the jobs and the prospect of young people in that area. as we look for a potential buyer we put sixty million pounds into the area so that we can get new trading opportunities for jobs and new developments in the area that will give jobs in the future but i share my anger about what happened and the

government will do everything we can to make sure people who lose jobs get jobs in the future and if we can avoid it people don't lose jobs at all. >> since introduction of the new rules, since 2008 the number of people taking the test has declined by $0.52 and a number of people crossing the test by $0.58 and it is extremely important in the u.k.. how will the prime directive 5 a very poor system? >> i will take the figures she has given me and ask the minister to look into this matter. it is important to have a strong motorcycle industry in this country and it is important questions about the specifics of tests be answered. >> committed of rape in 2005 based on dna. isn't it the case that if storage was restricted to three

years he would be walking free. >> if this is a very important issue, a national debate would help us resolve these issues. last year there were 832 matches to the national dna database and these were made in cases of murder, manslaughter and rape and that is what it was supported by families of victims as being essential to protect the public so any proposal from the conservative party that reduces the ability of that dna register to find those people who are criminals is a step backwards for justice in the country. the conservative party will think again about a policy that would lead people who are guilty free as a result of our inability to take the action necessary. >> words of respect about lt. douglas would be echoed in every corner of the community from where he came.

does the prime minister agree that nearly everyone in this country supports our troops but there is a sizable proportion of the population who are skeptical of rollback and does he feel with me that there's a moral imperative on him and his ministers to articulate and inform the value of the work of doing that and the necessity of stabilizing that region. >> i share the sympathies he expresses to the family of his constituents and i share with him the urgency of persuading the country that first of all we are in afghanistan because there is a threat of terrorism on the streets of britain and i repeat that the majority of the plots that have been discovered in britain to threaten the lives of people in britain the majority of these terrorist plots come from the afghanistan/pakistan area. they don't come from plot with in britain or europe, they