will the prime minister personally get involved with this and get this resolved as a matter of urgency? >> i will try and find time to see this there's today. i was looking at this issue last i was looking at this issue last night. i saw a picture on the local football team and a made me think about how vital it is to get these jokes as quickly as we can. there has been a debate is whether these -- i will have a look at this petition and see what can be done. >> will my right arm to tell the house what is worth what is worse to deny that definite or to have no plan to bring it back into powers? >> i think if that were in those

three stages of miliband the final part which is i think they have finally accepted there is a deficit and they voted for 30 billion pounds of adjustment they cannot have managed to tell us how much they are going to raise in taxes what they're going to do in spending. they have had four and a half years to come up with an economic policy and they have got no plan for our country. >> my 95-year-old, my 95-year-old constituent was taken by ambulance to the hospital where she waited six hours in the corridor before being admitted. the next morning she was moved to another hospital because there were no beds available. as the prime minister think that axing the elite and the 24 360 inpatient beds that he proposes will make it more or less likely

in the future? >> the truth is nationwide 94% of the people this year so far have been seeing a doctor within four hours at the ama but everyone in the house knows and everyone who is a neighboring member of parliament noted he is absolute instrumental in spreading disinformation campaign about his local hospitals and for once he should take the truth and put it on a leaflet. >> thank you mr. speaker. some people are very quick to criticize when there are challenges in the nhs. it must be right to celebrate its successes. therefore will the prime minister congratulate milton keynes hospital and the university of buckingham for establishing a new medical school to train the next generation of clinicians they raise standards at our hospital? >> i'm very happy to join my honorable friend in doing that. making sure we educate the next

generation of doctors and nurses and clinicians is absolutely vital. what we see under this government is 9000 more doctors 3300 more nurses. we are trading 1.3 million more people in ame and there are 6 million more outpatient appointments. that is what is happening and all credit to the hard-working staff who are carrying out the vital work. >> mr. jim sheridan. >> mr. speaker welfare benefit recipients are often demonized what but does the prime minister agree the real problem for taxpayers are those employees that can afford to pay well above the minimum wage today lifting hard-working families have a state dependency? >> i'm in favor of the living wage and those organizations that can pay a living wage should pay a living wage. it's a very good thing that should happen but in addition to that i noticed the leader of

the opposition doesn't pay the living wage so maybe he can start in his own backyard. that shut him up. in addition to that in addition to seeing minimum wages rise we should also be taking the lowest paid people out of tax and under this government we have taken 3 million out of tax. >> order. >> order.

statement by the home secretary theresa may. >> thank you mr. speaker and i would like to make a statement about the terrorist attacks and the threat we face from terrorism and the united kingdom. it will take some time for us to learn the full details of the attacks last week but the basic facts are now clear. 17 innocent people were murdered in cold blood and a number of others were injured. amity kula valley who attacked the jewish supermarket claimed claims actions were carried out in the name of isil. on confirmed reports suggest sharif kouachi the two brothers that attacked the office of charlie opto were associated with al qaeda in the arabian peninsula in yemen the same affiliate that has been in contact with the man who murdered in 2015.

as the appalling events in paris were unfolding this house was debating the government's counterterrorism and security bill and the threat level in the united kingdom which is set by the independent joint terrorism analysis center and remains severe. this means a terrorist attack in our country is highly likely and could occur without warning. three serious terrorist plots have been disrupted in recent months alone. nearly 600 people from this country have traveled to syria and iraq to fight. around half of them have returned and there are thousands of people from across europe who have done the same. as i said during the passage of the counterterrorism bill and the many repeated occasions the government will do everything it can to keep the public safe. as soon as the attacks in france to place the government increased security at the u.k. border. officers from order forced the

police and other organizations intensify checks on passengers vehicles and goods entering the u.k. and we offer the french government all the assistance necessary including the full cooperation of our police and security and intelligence agencies. on sunday before i attended the peace rally in paris i had talks with my counterparts from europe, the united states and canada to discuss what action we can take together. there was firm support for all the countries present for new action to share intelligence track the movement of terrorists and defeat the ideology behind the threat. it's important we deliver on the stalks and my officials the security minister and i will keep up the pace in particular when it comes to passenger name records with other european member states. on monday the prime minister defense secretary and i held a security meeting with senior officials to review the palace attacks on the wrist of the u.k.

and a similar attack. of course we have long had detailed plans for dealing with these kinds of attacks. the house will recall the attacks of mom by in two of mom buy into those made when terrorists armed with assault weapons and explosives took the lives of more than 150 people. since 2010 and learning the lessons of that attack we have improved our firearms capability and the speed of military response and we have enhanced protective security when possible through a range of other measures. with improved joint work between emergency services to deal specifically with marauding gun attacks attacks. specialists a joint police and fire teams are in place in key teams across england with equivalence in scotland and wales and they train and equip -- trained and equipped to manage casualties in the event of this kind of an attack. the police and other agencies regularly carry out exercises to test the response to a terrorist

attack and these exercises include scenarios that are similar to events in paris. we will ensure that future exercises reflect specific elements of the paris attacks so we can learn from them and be ready for them should they ever occur in the united kingdom. in addition i should tell the house of the peace concorde on appropriate military assistance when required across the country. the attacks in paris were enabled by the availability of assault weapons. although there is obviously number of illegal weapons in the u.k. we have some of the toughest gun rules in the world and is a result of a small proportion of overall recorded crime. the types of firearms used in the attacks in paris are not alone in the u.k. but they are extremely uncommon. however as the prime minister has said we must step up our efforts with other countries to crack down on the illegal weapons across borders. in particular the member states of the european union need to

work together to put the vast number of weapons in the countries of the former yugoslavia and disrupt the supply of weapons from other parts of the world especially north africa. mr. speaker the measures we have taken following events in paris are in addition to the substantial work the government has undertaken and continues to undertake to counter the threat from terrorism. last summer permit approved emergency legislation to prevent a sudden and rapid loss of access to communications data and the ability to intercept communications where it is necessary and proportionate to do so. parliament is of course scrutinizing the proposals in the counterterrorism and security bill as we speak. this important legislation will strengthen our powers to disrupt the ability people to travel abroad to fight and control their ability to return here. it would also enhance our ability to deal with those in the u.k. who pose a risk. in particular will about the relocation of people subject to

terrorism prevention and investigation measures to other parts of the country. in addition the prime minister has announced 130 million pounds over the next two years or agencies please than others in addition to the 1.5 billion pounds spent on policing every year. and of course his government has done more to confront the ideology that lies behind the threat we face. i've excluded more foreign hate speech is than the secretary before me. the deported abu homs and performed strategies that tackles nonviolent extremism as well as violent extremism and we have invested more time resources and money encounter narrative operations. mr. speaker we have always been clear that the police and security agencies must have the capability and the powers they need to do their job and for many attacks in paris the prime minister has reiterated that commitment. unfortunately when it comes to communications data in the

intercept of communications there is no cross party consensus and therefore no parliamentary majority to pass legislation to give the peace and security service the capabilities they need. let me be absolutely clear come every day that passes without the proposals in the communications data build the capabilities of the people who keep us safe diminishes. and as those capabilities diminish more people find themselves in danger and gas crimes will go unpunished and innocent lives will be put at risk. this is not as i have heard it said letting the government snoop on your e-mails. it is allowing the police and security services under tightly regulated and controlled regime to find out there who where when and how of communication but not its content so they can prove and disprove identified associations between suspects and thai victims and suspects to

specific locations. it's too soon to say for certain that it is highly probable the communications data was used in the paris attacks to locate the suspects and establish the links between the two attacks. quite simply mr. speaker if we want the police and security services to protect the public and save lives they need this capability. last weekend people of all nationalities, faiths and backgrounds came out onto the streets of france and other countries to demonstrate their opposition to terror and to stand for democracy and freedom. we must stand in solidarity with them and do all that we can to confront extremism and terrorism in all its forms. >> yvette cooper. >> thank you mr. speaker. the attacks last week in paris demonstrate the savagery with which terrorists seek to divide us.

the murders intolerance bigotry that they pursue aims to spread fear and also to sow division that they believe exists us against them. paris has not left the terrorist doing it we must not do so either. the french police have been praised for their actions that they took. charlie hebdo is being published today. faith are united of pouring the anti-semitism engraving for the victims of the attack on the kosher supermarket. muslims across the world have condemned the attack which is not islamic enough in the name of their religion and their brother the french muslim police officer has said my brother was killed by people who pretend to be muslims. they are terrorists, that's it. the prime minister and leader of the opposition attended the image of reality in paris along with the prime minister and i joined people in the square and saturday raising solidarity

worthy cause. in the attack the terrorists targeted writers they targeted those whose job it is to keep us safe. in other words they targeted both liberty and security in the response of the democratic governments everywhere to the source of attacks must be to defend both. governments need to keep our people safe so that we can enjoy the very freedoms that our democracy depends on. so returning to these issues in the home secretary statement. i'm concerned about the way the home secretary has made a statement today as i did not see the statement before coming into the house and i hope that she can set out what the reasons were and what is changed in the home office positions this morning that mentioned the statement that was changed at late notice. i welcome the action taken by the intelligence agencies and police to support their counterparts in paris and i think the whole house will want

to pay tribute to the work of our security and intelligence services and the counterterror police who do so much to keep us safe. it's important that they have the resources they need and i welcome the resources the home secretary referred to today. as you said the government has a counterterror bill going to apartment right now which we have supporting continued to support and which includes restoring the powers for serious suspects he abolished four years ago that we have called for to be reinstated. she will now that the agencies have pointed to the thread in this country the ongoing threat posed by the estimated 300 people returning from a complex and syria. could she tell us whether any of those estimated 300 have been persecuted? could she also confirmed that none of them are currently subject to -- even though these powers are supposed to be for dangerous suspects his activity needs to be restricted to keep us safe. can she tell us whether the

security service and police are reviewing all of those cases to see whether they could help especially with relocation powers restored or whether there was anything further that needs to change to those powers which are different from the previous control orders? could she also tell us how many of the estimated plaintiff have engaged in the channel program and does she agree that we should now make that compulsory for those returning which is something the counterterror bill does not yet do. on the issue of access to dangerous weapons you will also know there has been concern about reduce custom and border checks and increasing border checks for dangerous weapons. mr. speaker home secretary raised the issue on vacations data. technology is changing all the time and that means the law needs to keep up both in terms of capabilities of the agencies to get to the vital intelligence we need and in terms the oversight they would need. in july parliament supported

emergency legislation to ensure the agencies and police could maintain civility and this month supported extending the powers to ensure ip addresses are protected. in july all parties agree to support a review by david anderson the independent review of terrorism into both the powers and the oversight needed to keep up with changing technology. the home secretary referred to the previous medications data that was rejected three years ago by the joint committee that was established by the government to scrutinize it because they said it was too vague to why they try and put too much power directly in the hands of the home secretary. they recommended the new legislation needed to be drawn up in the far more limited way under the government should provide more evidence and clarity about what they wanted to achieve. since then the home secretary has not come forward with any

revised proposals. she has not come forward to meet to discuss them were put forward proposals to parliament even though we have said we were happy to discuss details with her. given the urgency she says there now is can i ask her why she did not come forward with revised proposals after the conclusions of the joint committee three years ago? in july she was happy to agree to the review by david anderson which is due to report before the election. today she has not mentioned that review. has she now discarded that statute of reviewer were she waiting for its conclusions? this is an extremely important issue and the detail matters. the detail about the powers of the capabilities that our intelligence agencies made but also the details about the safeguards and the oversight that are needed as well. we agree that the police and agencies do need to get the intelligence to keep us safe and to lead updated legislation and

we also need safeguards and stronger oversight to make sure powers are effectively in a purple he use but i would strongly caution the home secretary and the liberal democrats against setting up a caricatured argument between them about security on the one hand and liberty on the other because we need to protect both in our democracy and we need a responsible debate on getting the detail right. the terrorists on the first day taunted both the fashion police officers. charlie hebdo's editor at police protection to protect his freedom of speech. that shows the strong link between our security and liberty in any democracy. it's her speaker we know the most important thing to keep us safe in us safe and in it bonkers is making sure we have a cohesive communities that can prevent hatred from spreading. we have supported us to chew toy

and i hope the home secretary will not listen to the concern we have raised over some years that more needs to be done to have committed to the programs to tackle the hatred to challenge the spread of extremism including for social media as well as an local communities and organizations and i hope she will work with local government to that effect and can i also ask her if she is working with the community safety trust on tackling anti-semitism because we need to tackle all forms of extremism. terrorists try to silence us to cower us and divide us. perusso shauna's million marched as we stood in solidarity with them will not be silenced. we will not give into fear and we will not give into division as we defend our democracy because although some were targeted in paris we know this is about all of this.

>> thank you mr. speaker. matt first of all apologized to the secretary for her latest statement and apologized to her privately before when he came into the chamber and i'm happy to reiterate apology here on the floor of the house. and i also join her in paying tribute to our counterterrorist police and our security and intelligence agencies. i think we cannot say it often enough that these are people who are working day and night to keep us safe and protect us and many of them unseen and unknown and for obvious reasons if they are part of our security and intelligence agencies that we are grateful to them for the work that they do and i think we should as i say pay public recognition of the important role that they play. she asked me a number of questions covering a number of issues in this area. can i tell her that in relation to refuse there is no suggestion simply because a review was not mentioned in my statement that

we have sidetracked the review. david anderson is doing his work. he is undertaking as far as i'm aware number of discussions with relevant parties about the issues he is looking out. alongside of that of course are on parliamentary security committees conducting its work in looking at the questions of privacy and civil liberties and security. these key reviews i think will come forward and a time that will enable this house to be able to take account of those reviews when it does the job necessary for her to do which is looking at legislation which has a sunset clause the 2016th and taking account of all the aspects that have come forward in those two reviews. emulation where government does publish on a quarterly basis the number of people who are under tee pens and the question as to whether it should be put on is a

matter of the security service to initiate a request of some secretary that i look at their request and if i agree with requests there is a judicial court process that has gone through to ensure the position is reasonable and as they say is it's a matter of security service to come forward proposals that. the right honorable lady asked about channel compulsory. we do believe the channel does do an important work as prevent works with community groups but i think the decision as to whether an individual should be put into a channel program is one that should be taken on a case-by-case basis. we are very clear and have been in the discussions on the security bill in relation to the temporary exclusion orders where we'll be possible to ensure that people returning from syria or for turning on our terms for that is built to the appropriate but it may be actions may be

sought in relation to those individuals in the u.k. u.k.. that is needed in a case-by-case basis as to what's appropriate for the particular individual concerned. in relation to the question of firearms i think there's an issue for us working with others in the european union to look at the spread of firearms across the european union. as i said we have some of toughest gun laws in the united kingdom but we have already seen major exercises being undertaken lead by the national crime agency primarily in looking at the question of availability of firearms in the u.k. and that started before we saw these terrible attacks take place in paris. on the communications data builder is a difference of opinion among parties in this house as to what power should be taken by government. we did in fact respond to the proposals from the joint committee and we did didn't back provide revised proposals in relation to those measures. i'm clear in the prime ministers clear that this is an issue that

does need to be returned to and it's important i believe that we have the right powers that are available to be able to deal with these issues. finally she asked me if i would speak to the cst. of course we do speak to the cst on a regular basis and i have had a number of meetings with them but also of course the police have meetings with them and discuss the whole question of the protective security that is available and protective security has been stepped up at once when the threat level was raised and has been stepped up further. >> there have been various press reports that the director nmi five in his speech called for wide new powers of surveillance for the agencies. with the home secretary confirm that is not in fact the case and in the speech which the home secretary and i attended and

person the main concerns expressed by the director general was i general was that quote the changes in technology that people are using to communicate or making the agencies to maintain the capability to intercept the communications of terrorists. is that not indeed the prime requirement that the present time to ensure the agencies are continuing to be able to exercise the capability they have enjoyed for a number of years but which because of new technology is increasingly being denied? >> my right honorable friend is absolute correct in his description of what the director general general of am i-5 said in that speech. i think it's unfortunate that very often people mix up some of these aspects of communications and sometimes people believe what the government was trying to do in the indications bill was to expand the powers of the agencies. this is not the case and indeed is the director general of am i-5 said the ability to access

data is vital to our ability to protect our national national security unless must we maintain this capability or ability to protect the country will be eroded. it's maintaining that capability. that is what the communications data was about and that is why we and others as evidenced by that see it as important to do so. >> thank you mr. speaker. as there has been a revolution and to medications and in the 16 years since i introduced the proposals that became a regulation of investigatory powers in 2000 it's seems to me beyond argument that the legislation including the prospective communications data has to be revised. will the home secretary agree with me that the serious debate about the extent of the powers is not helped by the parody that these powers are being sought

sometimes by the english chancellor. could i also say to her since i believe the distance between the two main parties in this house is very narrow on this issue may we see the kind of collaboration which my right honorable friend the secretary speaking for so that we can resolve these issues as soon as possible and we can ensure that the intelligence and security agencies and the police have the capabilities today and tomorrow which they have had in the past under legislation which has freely been agreed on by this house? >> the right honorable gentleman is absolutely right. it's important to debate on this issue and the facts are properly presented and the arguments are properly presented and sadly the terminology that has been used about the bill being a a snoopers charter has said all sorts of hares running which are not acrid which don't actually

reflect was -- which was being proposed. .. that should be a principle of you and the principle that the prime minister reiterated in prime minister's questions today. i would have hoped that would have been a principle that could

have been held by everybody across all parties in this house of commons. certainly as far as i'm concerned, as far as the conservative party is concerned our manifesto would make it ear we'lntroduce >> we will make it clear that we will introduce legislation immediately for others and that we will use all of the legal powers sure where appropriate the available toence agencies have the maximum ability to intercept the communications of suspects while insuring that such intrusive techniques are of course properly overseen. >> mr. peter hayes. >> of course the secure services must have the necessary tools for the job but does she accept the priority is speak up, stand up against and where necessary confront islamophobia, anti-semitism, racism and the fascist groups like the bnt and their derivatives and spread this poison and also the vial prejudices of far too many

representatives and members of? >> the right honourable gentleman is absolutely right we need to stand up and send a very clear message from everybody in this house, we stand for freedom, we stand for freedom of the press, we stand for our democracy and we oppose the vile views that lead to the sort of incidents we've seen in paris. we must recognize if this country we've seen a number of terrorist attacks in this country over the years the most recent of course were in 2013 where we saw both rigby murder's murder but the murder of muhammad salim and attempt to plant a number of mosques in west midland and that was undertaken by a far right extremist. we must stand bense terrorism and extremism in all its forms. >> edward lee. >> one good thing come out of recent days the horrible events,

the affection of the british people for france and i must say as chairman of our committee group between the two parliaments on behalf of our back again customers -- benchers i like to extend to the french colleagues and say now as for the last 100 years our two nations stand shoulder to shoulder against tyranny and terror. >> we afree with the comments that my right honourable friend have made. we stand alongside france against terror and standing up for freedom and democracy. i have to say to him it was a very moving experience to be part of the march that took place in paris on sunday, to see so many people. i think it was nearly four million people across the whole of france, two million in paris itself and also reaction of the people alongside the march who were expressing constantly their support for all those who were standing for freedom, freedom of

the press but also freedoms of our democracy. >> mr. angus robertson. >> scottish part would like to stand with all members of the house in condemnation with the terrorist attacks in paris and put on the record for appreciation for those who work so hard to keep our society safe. the home secretary in her statement went into great detail, very welcome, about the cooperation with european union partners and with other countries. she didn't have the opportunity to update the house on the cooperation with the other jurisdictions within the united kingdom when it comes to policing and safety which is so important for us all us. no doubt taken the opportunity to speak to the scottish cabinet secretary since last week. could update the house what was discussed and how the u.k. government plans to cooperate with the scottish government, northern irish government and the welch administration? >> the discussions at official

level takes place about the preparedness for a attack similar to that took place in paris. we have obviously we work very closely with the both administrations. we particularly close work with the scottish government last year in preparation for the commonwealth games and joint exercises and some joint work and i have to say that the cooperation and the interaction between scotland and these forces in england and wales is very good when it comes across a wide range of matters but obviously the sorts of cooperation that takes place during these matters is very important. we'll continue to work with the administration at every level and ministerial and on these matters. >> is the secretary aware when the prophet muhammad moved from mecca to medina all those years ago to establish the islamic state did not establish a islamic caliphate you about

rather create ad multiphased society where jews and christians were rights to worship and retain their faiths? >> i'm grateful to my honourable friend for pointing that out and elucidating that fact to the house but i think it is very clear and everybody is very clear that this is not the attacks we saw are not about islam and the voices that we have heard from muslim communities here and muslim leaders here in the united kingdom and france and across the world are very clear these attacks were not undertaken in their name and that is a very clear message that we should reiterate. >> dobson. >> the home secretary satisfied with the capacity of the london fire and rescue service to respond to terror, any terrorist outrages that may occur in view of the current program of closure of fire stations including the fire station at

clark which serves an area which includes major hospitals, major railway stations and major tourist attractions which may very well be the premier targets of terrorism? >> a very, very bite deal of work has been undertaken in recent years in looking at the operations of the emergency services in the event that a terrorist attack should take place. work has been done as i indicated in my statement to bring together specialist teams from fire, you ambulance and across england and equivalence in scott lan and wales. we also introduced the joint emergency services interoperability program which is about insuring that it is easier for the three emergency services to work together in these circumstances and obviously we continue to update and to revise where necessary the protocals and the operational, the way in which these operations are conducted

to insure that our emergency services are able to do the job we all want them to do should an attack take place. >> michael elliot. >> thank you very much mr. speaker. i sat on the communications data joint committee three years ago and it lasted for six months and we heard extensive evidence and it was abundantly clear from numerous sources that this communications data is crucial it will save lives it will save those who threaten suicide. it will save children at risk and other types of incidents and dramas accidents crimes as well as terrorists. and help us catch terrorists. metropolitan police commissioner said it will save lives. the director of europol yesterday in the select committee said there was a gap -- >> order. >> i don't wish to be unkind to the honourable gentleman. he is a trained barrister. come on cut to the chase. a lost colleagues want to get in. short question and then sit

down. >> thank you very much. is she concerned home secretary, that the labour party had not made it clear that they would support communications data? >> i'm grateful to, i'm grateful to my right honourable friend pointed out significant number of people in positions where they are aware of the impact of communications data who have made the necessity of communications data well-known and public and i would say that i, as i've indicated i would hope that everybody in this house will understand and appreciate the importance of insuring that their, as far as possible, there are no safe spaces for the terrorists to communicate. >> home secretary were you aware that in the case of the london bombings and the brutal murder of lee rigby and now from earlier reports about both responsible for what happened in

paris last week, those involved were all on the periphery of investigations that had already been undertaken? will the home secretary give a commitment that weville urgent talks with the security service and the counterterrorism police leadership about how we can get smarter about reviewing those cases that have appeared, those individuals and networks, that have appeared on the periphery of previous investigations and clearly do pose a threat? >> well the right honourable gentleman is correct obviously the issue of those who appear on the periphery. it was an aspect that the intelligence security committee referred to in the report that they wrote on the murderer of fuse sill lear and rigby and woolridge. i have discussion with the counterterrorism policing and security services and it is a matter which i continue to talk to them. i think there are a number of issues we need to continue to look at, both those who apper at

the periphery of various groups but also the questions of links between potential terrorists and criminal activity of various sorts. >> jenkins. >> mr. speaker can i add my voice to those who support the updating of our communications capability merely to keep pace with changes in technology that in order to maintain the capabilities we already have but can i also invite the home secretary to use the latest incident as a case study to study what the journey is that a good islamic person that might take that finishes him up sass a terrorist? what is the psychological journey, what are the stimulants that create that terrorist and how do we get inside of that process in order to prevent it happening? >> it is of course important in looking at work that we do to try to prevent people from moving down the road to terrorist activity, preventing people from being radicalized, that we look at what are the

factors that determine factors that are in play when somebody does become a terrorist or indeed is being, is radicalized. i say to my right honourable friend these of course are issues that are already looked at and every opportunity to taken where we can learn lessons to identify what that journey is for individuals so that we can better insure that we are able to prevent that radicalization, prevent people from moving into terrorism but i also say to my honourable friend this will be complex, many factors involve and they will vary from individual to individual. >> keith bass. >> mr. speaker. is there any evidence of western europe spoke after security gap amongst police forces across europe to try to tack down online terrorists? terrorism has no boundaries, national boundaries, is she confident about the structures that currently exist and sharing

of information across europe and indeed across the atlantic? also a action taken bit internet companies? should we not now be looking at organization like the internet watch foundation that will deal specifically with counterterrorism? >> i think the right honourable gentleman that the question of the sharing of intelligence and sharing of the information where it is appropriate to do so across, between countries and particularly across europe is a matter that we discussed at the meeting that was held convened by the mr. cavener the french interior ministry on sunday. it's a matter where i think there is a role we looked at europol playing a role within that and of course we will work not only our other countries but also organizations such as europol to make sure we get the maximum benefit from the sharing of information that takes place so that we can have the maximum possibility ability to insure

that these attacks do not take place because we can identify the terrorists in advance. >> i'm very keen to accommodate colleagues but i would remind the house it es opposition today with two well-subscribed debates. what i'm looking for now people who will ask a short question without preamble and home secretary will supply with characteristic pithy replies i'm sure. >> unwise response of previous government as outrage led to iraq war and led to the failed i.d. cards. would she agree our response to this outrage must be one of sober wisdom, no the a rush to squander liberty against those violently wish to take them away? >> i say to my honourable friend it es entirely right we should respond in very sober and careful way and i say to my honourable friend and that what i and prime minister have done in the comments that we made. >> i'm sure the whole house is

very pleased to hear the home secretary say reallies lame has nothing to do with these attacks in paris and therefore take opportunity decrying the statement rupert murdoch made over the weekend where he said all muslims were to blame? and also ask him to get a grip of stocks news and so-called terrorist experts who sat around insulting birmingham, london and everywhere else with their silly comments? >> i, i agree with the honourable lady it is important that we do reiterate the message that this is not about islam. it is about a perversion of islam and that there are muslims in this country and other countries around the world who condemn these acts of violence and acts of terrorism. their voices are being heard. i think in increasing numbers their voices are being heard. as i said earlier they are sending a very clear message this is not in their name. i also say to the honourable lady at that freedom of the press means freedom of the press

>> dr. phillip lee. >> thank you mr. speaker. extremism find fertile ground in communities not a simulated into the society. bearing that in mind i hope home secretary will support compulsory and written english to be part of british citizenship. i think shared values underpin a strong society that women in such communities if emancipated would pacify young men who might tempt to copy extremist behavior so graphically seen in paris last week? >> i say to my honourable friend of course the government has increased the requirements in relation to english capability the ability to speak english and understand english for those coming into the united kingdom. he mentions the role of women in this. i share with him i think a view that it is important that we do hear female voices from the muslim community and can i

command sarah what you know who once again -- khan spoken about this issue. very last part of last year i attend ad inspirational event she held and hashtag taking a stand campaign she was running with muslim women around the country saying they wish to take a stand against those trying to radicalize young people in muslim communities. >> mr. speaker will the home second secretary rejecting new imperialism we hear after incidents like this which seeks to condemn the killings but somehow excuse the actions by blaming ourselves, in this case by saying that the cartoons in "charlie hebdo" were unnecessarily provocative? does she not aprethat we can not continue to absolve those engaged in terrorism of their responsibilities and that we must agree that responsibility for these actions lies scarily with those who kill innocent

people? >> the only people responsible for terrorist attacks are the terrorists themselves. they are criminals and we should never let anybody forget that. >> thank you, mr. speaker. can i welcome the statement today and press on my right honourable friend i welcome her words and states particularly tackling extreme ideology but ask her to be mindful and security services to be mindful of places of worship where often mainstream tolerant open opinion can often be marginalized what you do create a vacuum where extremism does thrive and create the roots of so much this poisonous ideology? >> i think i share with my honourable friend a concern that we are dealing with extremism in all its forms and where it appears and to be mindful of issues that he has raised. of course the government will be publishing in due course a new extremism strategy will go beyond the simply the counterterrorism strategy we published so far. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

the acts that occurred in paris were not were carried out by terrorists and not in my name and not the religion i follow and i want to be set straight on that and these people are totally, totally undeservedly attacked they took. she had bills proposals, what are they, where are they and when will we see them? >> can i first of all commend the honourable gentleman for the comments that he has just made. i think it is important that when somebody like himself stand up in this chamber and makes that very clear message about terrorism and that we, none of us, none of us support terrorism in this chamber. we condemn it absolutely. we did at the time prepare and indeed indicate to people the areas of the communications data bill where we were willing to make changes in response to the views that have come from the

joint committee and indeed we said we were taking on board i think virtually all the comments the joint committee made. >> thank you mr. speaker. does the home secretary agree we should be serious about our internal security and safety and security of our borders including at dover? we need to promote integration and unity of integration over the division of multiculturalism. and also really important that we insure that our borders are properly strengthened and security is maintained including at calle? >> my honourable friend is right, of course as i indicated in my statement in immediate response to the attacks in paris, the border and others at our borders took appropriate steps to increase the security and intensify the checks taking place of the it is right that we do maintain that appropriate level of security at our borders, both here in the u.k., and obviously juxtapose controls over elsewhere. and it is also important i

think, that we recognize that within this united kingdom there are people of, a variety of faiths and peel of no faith. what is important that we all accept and tolerate people of different faiths and not tolerate, but recognize there are people of different faith who is have different beliefs and if we disagree with them, and the way to discuss that is through discussion but it is important that we allow the freedom of people to be able to worship in the way they wish to, to be able to follow the faith they wish to be able to follow. >> mr. sawa. >> unjustifiable and horrific scenes in paris were just not an attack in france but an attack on peace freedom and indeed islam. this isn't a clark of civilizations. it is a street fight between right and wrong and between humanity and insanity. on that basis can i urge caution from the home secretary, the

worst time to react is when it is raw. you can't defeat extremism with extreme reactions. finally can i say the true muslim that day was the policeman who lost his own life protecting the freedom of a publication to ridicule his own faith. and actually in his tragic story received the obvious truth that freedom is the right to be wrong. it is never the right to do wrong. >> well i commend the comments that the honorable gentlemen has made and as the shadow home secretary pointed out to the in her statement the brother of the murdered policeman gave a dignified response and one we can all recognize and support and it is important that we do recognize that these people who carry out these attacks, these are criminal. they're terrorists, they are not doing it in the name of any religion and we should be very

clear about the message that we give. >> julian smith. >> on the data gaps will the home secretary confirm she will be inspired by the patriotism of the noble lord evans and people such as the head of mi5 and avoid any consultation with the deputy prime minister on these issues who during the "today" program interview put party es so disgracefully over national security? >> well it is, it is no surprise to anybody in this house that the deputy prime minister and i have a different opinion on the matter of the communications data issue and the communications data bill. i believe that it is important that we maintain those capabilities and i reiterate as i said earlier it is not a snoopers charter. >> dawn ab bottom. >> home secretary agrees there can not be sin sill la of the excuse of the attack we saw in paris last week and security must be paramount in the long

run one of things that will make us safe is to be able to reach out to the marginalized communities in this country that mirror the marginalized communities from which those killers came and whether addressing education unemployment they can and these are matters that we had to consider for everybody.

>> mr. robin walker. >> thank you mr. speaker. as well as the muslim community which has been quick to condemn terrorism. and english language newspaper will be commemorating this year, does the home secretary agree, that the survival of that charter, over 800 years and recent events demonstrate the pen if properly defended can be mighty err than the sword? >> i, pay tribute to my honourable friend and the constituency he represents and the links that he has as he says with the magna carter. it was a very important document. it is right that we celebrate the anniversary of that document this year. and, i think we can all recognize the importance of the words within that document and the fact that it has survived and those principles have survived over the centuries. i think it is indeed testament to the fact that the but also the response to the attacks and the murders of those cartoonists

and journalists at "charlie hebdo," to make everybody absolutely clear that the pen is mightier than the sword. >> mr. sherman. >> mr. speaker, will the that the lessons of paris are our real strength is in unity and indeed in fraternity? we should keep together on this? there is not a big divide on this. we must keep together across parties and also we must have a dialogue a conversation, with the vast majority of muslim people in this country, that are law-abiding and help us to defeat terrorism? >> well, i would say to the honorable gentleman he is absolutely right. the majority of people in muslim muslim people living in this country do want to defeat terrorism as well and want to insure they're playing a full part in our society and it is right we make every link we can with them in doing that. >> new organizations seeking own independent professional judgment as whether they reprint

the cartoons of "charlie hebdo," while in their own eyes many were avoiding risk of offending some of their readers. in the eyes of jihadis some undoubtedly were viewed as intimidated into censoring that for me is reason enough to reprint. does my right honourable friend true free speech not illusion of this includes the right to insult and defend. we don't defend free speech if that is truly what we want to do, by casting aside those who push at the boundaries of free speech? >> so i absolutely agree with my honourable friend and it should be the case. freedom of the press means that the press should be free to publish what they choose to publish, within the within the law of course, but as prime minister reiterated earlier, freedom of the press which we all believe in means that we should accept that they can publish what they wish to publish within the law. we should not set artificial boundaries on that. >> mr. speaker, can the home

secretary update the house how will prevent is working to reaching people at grass roots to protect young people? whatever it does to protect the civil liberties of people through new legislation the security service can't be everywhere and that network on the ground is most important? >> i'm certainly happy to give the honourable lady some figures in relation to prevent. and, there are certainly authority areas currently classified as prevent priority areas and there are 40 more supported areas, all of which are, eligible for funding for prevent projects and since early 2012 local projects have reached over 45,000 people. so this is an extensive piece of work that is being undertaken. obviously we continue to look at prevent and how we help to insure it is doing its job better, hence the safety and security bill. >> on monday the leader of the house and myself met with parents and governors of matilda

marks kennedy at the school in my vicinity. the discussion of the attacks on paris was raised. can the home secretary take opportunity to allay fears of some of those parents and indeed many other people who weren't at the meeting about the anti-semitic attacks how indeed we can keep their children safe while in school? >> this is very important. as i indicated earlier, i do meet, i have met on a number of occasions with the cst and other jewish community leaders. my last meeting with them was shortly before the christmas recess. we are committed to insuring that the work of the trust and others is supported in keeping jewish communities safe. as i also indicated earlier, the police also do talk with cst and with others and indeed with individual institutions about the protective security that can be provided and have been providing extra as i understand it some extra patrols in

certain areas to insure that there is greater support that is given. but i'm very clear that nobody should feel that they are likely to be subject to the short of -- sort of anti-semitic attacks we've sadly seen in the united kingdom over the past year and it is important people are able to live in the country to follow their faith and live a life free from fear. >> mr. samuels. >> last week while these men were rampaging through the streets of paris a leading muslim spokesman in northern ireland, dr. al wazir was telling the bbc that the west brought this about because of their foreign policy. will the tear of state join me calling those within leadership muslim community and say and do nothing which would give any justification for people to believe that terrorism in the

name of their faith is ever justified and to realize that words such as this only bring and create division? >> it is absolutely right it is important for those in leadership roles in the must plim community as many have been doing to make it very clear that these terrorists attacks are not about their religion their faith and they are not in their name. and it is also very important that we insure that very clear message is sent that the only people responsible for terrorist attacks are the terrorists themselves. >> madam deputy speaker. if liberal democrats will not support what is needed for defense of our nation, will my right honourable friend, necessary legislation to fill capabilities gaps and will be taken forward as soon as possible within the next

parliament. >> i'm very happy to give my confirmation on that to my honourable friend. we are very clear we'll take this legislation forward. >> jim shannon. >> thank you mr. speaker. there has been significant raise in coordinated anti-semitic attacks in london, glascow and can the home secretary tell us what steps have been taken to stop the coordinated action and stop attacks on people across the united kingdom and northern ireland. >> i have am happy to happy please that i have meetings with police and jewish communities and groups and obviously the cst and role they play in providing protective security for various synagogues and jewish schools and so forth and looking a the this we also looked at number of other aspects. i had a meeting recently which also involved the director of public prosecutions and chief executive of the college of policing looking at the advice

and guidance available to insure that the police and prosecution service respond properly when anti-semitic attacks are undertaken and prosecution is possible it is taken forward. >> thank you mr. speaker. the government task force on radical extremism chaired bit prime minister recommended in 2013 a new order for groups fallen short of legally termed terrorists but undermined democracy and penalties that radicalize others. could you home secretary can be excluded from terrorism because they are blocked by liberal democrats? if so, given comments from the shadow home secretary and in light of recent events in paris would it be good to revisit recommendations made by the prime minister's task force which will be most welcome? >> my honourable friend is, raises these issues. i've been very clear, it has not been possible to take those particular proposals forward on

a government basis but i was also very clear and indeed i said this in the speech that gave at our party conference last year, that it is the conservative party's intention to take those proposals forward. >> thank you madam deputy speaker. -- is key to prevent radicalization and given new roles and responsibilities at schools, colleges and universities, can the home secretary state what proportion of the 2015, 16 budget is allocated to these organizations to implement that and what support is provided to principals? >> the funding for prevent has increased over recent years but further money will be made available as part of the 130 million-pound that the prime minister announced last november that was going going to be available over the 2014, '15, '16 years. a majority of that will be for

agencies but, other funding is for the home office which will include funding for prevent but will also include funding for ct policing and obviously discussions are taking place how that is most appropriately spent. >> stephen mostly. >> thank you. like a couple of earlier speakers in 2012 i was a member of the joint committee looking at communications data draft bill. we supported the need for new legislation but also proposed a number of safeguard we felt would improve the bill. would my right honourable friend confirm in any future legislation those safeguards would be considered and hopefully included? >> i'm very happy to be concerned with that. the joint committee came back with a very well-considered and detailed response and the government was clear that we would take on board the recommendations, certain recommendations that the joint committee put forward and that continues to be my view as home secretary but obviously as a conservative politician looking

at the prospect of conservative government bringing this legislation forward. >> gregory campbell. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the home secretary referred to the capabilities of people keeping us safe diminishing. in the context of the security of the people of entirety of united kingdom how central does she think the national crime agency and how important is it that that national crime age is fully operational in all of the united kingdom, particularly in northern ireland? >> i believe national crime agency does play an important role. obviously its es clear focus is on serious and organized crime, but border crime and child exploitation and online protection. i think it's a valuable agency. i think it has already shown the benefit of setting up the national crime agency and operations it has already undertaken. i consider it would be appropriate, it would be beneficial if it was possible for that agency to operate in

northern ireland as it does in other parts of the united kingdom. >> bob black. >> thank you, madam deputy speaker. number of anti-semitic incidents on the rise but sure say surveys demonstrate a greater public acceptance of anti-semitic attitudes. what can the right honourable friend to the jewish commune and we have zero tolerance of ant at the symphony tim and we need to educate the public that such attitude should not exist in this country. >> my right honourable friend is right, we should be very clear we can't tolerate anti-semitism. we can deal with this in a number of ways. it is important we provide advice in protective security for those at threshold of being subject to anti-semitic incidents. but i think it is important for us to give a clear message as a government from this house that we will not accept anti-semitic

incidents and work led by department of communities and local government and the task force they brought together on anti-semitism plays an important role. >> thank you madam deputy speaker. i previously was on the civil libertarian side on these arguments but given recent events not just in france but also where i've come to the conclusion that the home secretary is absolutely right in what she is doing. can i return to the subject of the jewish community. the home secretary has seen the front page of the independent today, the shows that huge amounts of jewish people have apprehension living in the united king do. i welcome statements she made to other members but can she make a statement about anti-semitism but the positive contribution that the jewish people bring to this country and inorder to ensure they feel proud of living here? >> i share my honourable friend's concerns. i think it is would be a matter

of deep concern to all in this house when people from the jewish community as surveys suggest are feeling it less easy to live in the united kingdom. we've seen over the years people leaving other countries in the european union as a result of anti-semitic incidents. i never thought we would see the day when surveys were showing this sort of feeling for people, jewish people here in the united kingdom. it is absolutely right not only that we are clear in our condemnation of anti-semitism but we give protective security and other support i referred to but also we do send a very clear message that members of the jewish community play an important and significant role in our communities in their contributions to our society. we should welcome them here of the we should applaud what they, the contributions that they make and we should insure that they all feel able to stay living in the united kingdom and making their important

things improve. >> coming up next a conference with bob goodlatte. then the justice department holding a conference on policing methods and standards in the u.s. later today, from the british house of commons, david cameron talks about last week's attacks in paris. >> former treasury secretary larry summers and "washington post" columnist will participate in a discussion on income inequality and the economy. live coverage from the center for american progress starts tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. and later, christine lagarde will talk about health of the global economy. watch at 11:00 a.m. eastern.

>> the chair of the house judiciary committee congressman baca.talked about some of the priorities of this committee. they include the neutrality antitrust laws and prison reform. he also talks about immigration and challenges to the health care law. the virginia republican spoke to reporters at a christian science monitor event. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> we would like to welcome chairman bob goodlatte.

it as well as others. chairman goodlatte earned his bachelor's degree in maine where he served as president of new college republicans and he came to virginia to attend law school. the congressman practiced law from 1981 until his election to congress on his first try in 1992, part of his law press practice included immigration law. in addition to chairing the judiciary committee, he also served on the house all the culture committee where he was chairman from 2003 until 2000 evan. he is interested in technology issues and serving as cochair of the congressional internet congress and the working group for that. he has a biography and we now is always on the record here

request at no live blogging or tweeted. we will e-mail several pictures of the session to all of the appropriate people as soon as the breakfast ends. please do the traditional thing. i will happily call on who we can when available. so maybe a bit longer than our usual three or four minutes of opening come after that we will move to questions around the table. thank you for doing this. >> thank you for inviting me back to the breakfast. it is a pleasure to be here with my wife, mary ellen who is a practicing attorney in virginia and doesn't get to washington as

often as i would like, she's going to be coming more often because my daughter who lives in washington will make us grandparents soon and we are very pleased and that will be coming up. but i do want to take the opportunity to do something that has become a tradition and you are allowing me to announce my committee agenda for the house judiciary committee at this gathering and we have done this before and i'm honored to be here to do it again. so let me start by saying that i am proud of the numerous legislative competence that we had in the 100 urging congress including the passage of the bipartisan innovation act. and there are several flip

frivolous lawsuits. the house judiciary committee will be looking to build upon the work from the 113 congress and under my leadership the committee will continue to advance an agenda that is focused upon creating jobs and making america more competitive. and this includes creating jobs and economic prosperity and including accountable relations with the american people. .. provide relief from the excessive regulation from job creators who need it most. american small-business owners are suffocating under bureaucratic red tape and the uncertainty discourages employers from hiring new police to expand their business. that means higher prices prices, lower wages, if you

were jobs and less economic growth and a less competitive america purpose yesterday the house passed the act that seeks to raise in excess of regulatory cost. the legislation that i introduced with collin peterson requires a federal government to adopt the least costly method to effectively implement the al lot. washington's endless road blocks to drain america's hard earned wages and stand in the way of opportunity and growth. americans face of a burden of $3 trillion from federal taxation and regulation and our federal with the tory burden is larger than the 2013 gdp to fall top-10 countries in the world and that and -- adds up to $15,000 per american household nearly 30% of average household income of 2013 in an effort to protect from effective regulation

they will look at net neutrality last year the committee held a hearing if antitrust law or regulation is more effective to protect consumers on the internet. the conclusion was the regulatory approach leaves consumers with fewer choices and higher prices the antithesis of neutrality. the internet does not need the one-size-fits-all government mandate to insure neutrality and consumers to not need an extra $84 per been added to their annual bill as a result of some of that neutrality eric regulations. the key to the open in free internet of antitrust laws they allow for maximum flexibility and consistently demonstrate their ability to prevent discriminatory and fancy competitive conduct in the marketplace i also want

to mention the judiciary committee has an array of state taxation issues across state lines that we will plan to address in this congress to permit act passed with strong bipartisan support last year and we intend to move that for word as well. that is on and do and discriminatory taxes like access fees to the internet that can add 24 turvey 5% to the cost compared to what does happen right now with your telephone that is one issue and another is taxation of internet sales. is to get the revenue that

they missed when someone buys an item from august a. we are hard at work for that. into focus on legislation like the fact acta that encourages openness and transparency in the system in to insure they make the illegitimate victim did not make abusive claims they will build upon the work of our over criminalization in task force that i created last congress with a redundant collection the one of those recuring themes that the judiciary committee review all criminal laws and

i'm happy to report that last week the house clarified the jurisdiction but crew realization over criminal law. by making this change but in those rare instances by amending a statue to into a criminal penalty without the penalty itself. looking to work with other committees to ensure the new contract is worthy of criminalization that are appropriate drafted i believe the small clarification of the jurisdiction will allow us to address any problems associated with a tangled web of criminal law. also to discourage frivolous patent regulation the

strength lies on the ability to build on innovation in the 21st century the last congress it was passed with overwhelming support in this legislation is necessary to protect american businesses large and small from abusive patent litigation despite that wide range of supporting refuse to accept a look forward to working with the new senate to get patent reform access as quickly as possible traditionally their judiciary committee will continue the important work with our comprehensive review of copyright law. the goal has been to determine if they are still working in the lead to a shoe reward creativity and innovation part of the successful review is to bring diverse stakeholders'

together to have a conversation on various issues. so far we have held 18 hearings and i believe they have been successful and productive with the various stakeholders interested parties to discuss the issues they face we will hold hearings to examine the last remaining issues and we will work together with all stakeholders from the technology committee to find consensus on the areas of the copyright act that need improvement. for the more technology will help solve many of the pressing problems our nation currently faces. make sure the efforts are focused on creating incentives to encourage innovation to eliminate policies that hinder it so looking at modernizing the privacy act to reflect the current digital economy also

to have less stable fiscal outlook to look at broad institutional reform by the balanced budget amendment. of the first day of the new congress i reintroduce constitutional amendments the senate failed by one vote to pass the balanced budget constitutional amendment. con presented to the state for ratification in 1995 we would not be facing the fiscal crisis we are today to balance the federal budget would be the norm rather than the exception. in order for congress to make the tough decisions necessary for fiscal responsibility congress must have the external pressure of a balanced budget requirement as 49 other 50 states do. every congress since 2007 have introduced amendments require congress to balance the budget with as consider that the impact it has on our future in future generations and should not passenger were children or

grandchildren the bleak future better and sustainable spending has created. the amendment will force congress to eliminate spending and make decisions to balance the budget. congress was also continue the debate on immigration reform. we all agree the system is in desperate need of repair and not working as efficiently as it should. the first priority however is stopping president obama unconstitutional actions that has disregarded the will of the american people to violate the constitution by unilaterally changing immigration laws they not only threatened to throw in checks and balances but i believe the executive over reach must be stopped. they will consider several amendments to cut off all funding for these actions

whether appropriation funds in it in terms of fixing a broken emigration system with a step-by-step approach to address many of the issues and basing the immigration system this includes comments in stages to the legal immigration program including those that address high skilled workers so works in the best interest of our country. >> we need to do a time check. >> i just have so much information. the judiciary committee will play a key role in safeguarding the constitutional rights of u.s. and decisions from the first amendment protection of religious freedoms to the

fourth and it is a safeguard against unreasonable search and seizure to the fifth amendment private property guarantees. this obligation is forever enshrined working to make sure government continues to protect these freedoms reforming our intelligence program that civil liberties and national security are protected class congress operated under fisa had three hearings and reached agreement on the bipartisan in usa freedom act is

as chairman of the house judiciary committee my duty is to make scheerer it is focused on opportunity prosperity and freedom for all americans but is truly an honor to consider it -- to serve our nation in this capacity afford to continuing the good work restarted last congress on these issues and david i. m. dunn. [laughter] you can say we have a lot of work to do is we have broad jurisdiction so in whatever area you are interested.

>> i will do one or two, and then we will start. in december you told the hill you wanted to move immigration reform legislation early in the new congress. >> the president's actions have definitely complicated this considerably. there is a matter of trust involved in quite frankly the american people did not trust this president to enforce immigration laws that has been further harm to that the massive and administrative legalization the president has undertaken is not only a bad immigration policy but a serious threat to separation of powers because of a president can do this a president can do anything. i believe article one powers

of the constitution clearly direct legislative authority whose duty is to safely execute the lot. so stopping the president's actions are critical in my opinion to making progress on immigration reform to start with enforcement than moving to a host of other issues to determine the appropriate status. >> there is a lot of talk with your opening remarks about the amendments offered with the fiscal 2015 whole land security appropriations bill and a relief of debt they will complete the defiant hautboys power grab with the deferred action and a more recent grant dove deferred action so there is a lot of talk about the

amendment that they will make life very difficult for senate republicans will have to vote on the backup provisions with the business they're holding the senate. are you worried about your senate colleagues? >> no there is concern in the senate with the house that the president's executive overreach. again this stems beyond immigration to the question whether the president can take his pen and his phone and affable whole host of areas where he has done so beyond the scope of the laws whether obamacare or drugs enforcement or environmental laws there is a limit to the president's powers nt has

definitely in the opinion of the house in the senate has exceeded that authority. so and we're beating this week with senate republicans with there eighth annual retreat that will start later today with this will certainly be a hot topic discussion but we work collaboratively with this said it to see which way is the news said it can help to challenge a president who is succeeding authority. >> with that patent overhaul bill talking about the washington d.c. quicksand what changes are you making your what needs to change? to allow policy remains? >> we're always listening to

ideas about how to approve the patent system. in three years ago with the bipartisan bill that was designed to reprove the quality of our patent system moving forward and we're already seeing some of those results but it left a legacy of the least two decades of patents that were utilized by the patent trolls to cause a lot of problems for lot of businesses and to a disincentive bias to encourage job creation and innovation. that was the purpose and it did pass the house with broad support and then it went to the senate where there was a lack of will to

take up the issue even though in the last senate there was broad support in the field is even stronger in the new senate and they're very interested to begin an early start on that. we are collaborating but at this point my position is we have a strong bill that should move through the house and over to the senate forded changes and improvements that need to be made real open to that though we have a good product out of the gate and that is the foundation moving forward. >> so the touche channels that you use to challenge the executive authority to

ease the goes into savings aside however that is resolved are there any incentives after that between now and 2016 for piecemeal reform? >> we call it step-by-step because there are aspects but there is a bore them approach. a lawsuit has them brought against the administration by 24 attorneys general and their legal theories will be different than one that could be brought by the house are the senate but no

decision has been made. using the spending power is the legislation that we take up today is all about. so the simple fact congress has the right to appropriate funds or programs under article one. and if we cut off the funding to make it clear there is no legal authority for the president's actions said guido need to go with litigation. but if that doesn't work out that only should we continue to support efforts to bring

litigation to this area the congress to bring its own action because separation of powers argument that the president is acting as he does not have the authority and that is article one that is separate from any individual or group of attorneys general have a basis. we need to have the people have us write the laws of the land. >> those things aside to challenge the president. >> the home and security committee passed one bill

through the committee that judiciary committee passed four bills sold dealing with various aspects of enforcement and immigration. those bills are all very good and it is my opinion we should continue work on those bills but there is no lack of trust in the president to enforce the laws so those who would like to see immigration reform in the congress say why would we reach agreement where we cannot trust the president? so that causes a problem so those who agree are less motivated to take those tough decisions when they get a good portion of what

they want in terms of the administrative legalization and don't have to make those concessions and that goes back to the separation of power issue this president is not making it easier. >> with your priorities the speaker last fall said that congress really should take the issue up. and last year with a great profile are there any plans to do that? should be right off any hope of the republicans to move

on and immigration tell this president is gone? >> that will depend on how much progress was made to enforce the law rather than circumvent the law. and there are two separate with a lot of other related issues to that that stem from the over criminalization task force to produce a lot of good ideas in a whole host of areas we're interested in reviewing these areas that includes looking to make sure people who are charged with crimes are indeed the actual perpetrator and not

someone who is falsely charged if we could improve the criminal justice system we're interested in looking at that. there is even more ground looking at a prison reform and this is the area that some of the state's have had considerable success so i ask my staff last year to look as states that have had a reduction in prison population either with the crime rates or the recidivism rates and be found several states that have that. so we had a hearing and they gave us a number of ideas on prison reform. barrasso concerned with 5,000 criminal lot.

that is one of the reasons we ask for the change of house rule that any legislation that criminalizes an activity can be reviewed by the judiciary committee to make sure it is not duplicative it ended is a comparable pattern for the penalties provided. but most of those did not show criminal intent. as individual or an employee of a business or a small business owner good for your customers and not only if you run afoul of the federal

regulations deny your also a charge rethink that is harmful there should be a requirement to show criminal intent before your criminally liable before civilly liable. we're also recognize that states have thousands of criminal laws. sometimes we do but not always so there is work to be done but to see that come out of the committee with a number of bills in this area >>. >> talking about the memos

but it is inappropriate for ice to lay out in a prior-- in that way and if not to ship rigo after of undocumented immigrants or deportation? >> the fact of the matter is that any government in any branch of government has limited resources than they need to make decisions. but they go beyond simply saying but then they go sarah a deferred action process and conferred a legal status continuing for years and decades for an individual.

it is if you are changing the status of people who are not lawfully here so we have not changed so the amendments taken up today so we look at those which is to relax of a larger program of childhood rivals in the first was into millions the president said he could act unilaterally on to use discretion to not prosecute with the a ray of benefits

to allow them to remain in the united states and there is no policy decision made by though lawmakers and the president has taken it upon himself to change the lot. -- law the actual use those words with his decision in december on more than 20 occasions he said he did not have the authority to change the law in the area he acted upon. we agreed and we think we should have restrained himself under his own understanding of the law but the more than members -- memos -- the more than that memos have restrained the growth of 45 million people that he seeks to legalize at this point in time if he

does not have the authority we have to challenge that. >> talked about concerning benefits are you talking about the of daca program? >> i am talking about travel documents our tax benefits benefits, tax credits to list all those right now i cannot with some although certain ones are not allowed under though lot. -- law. >> there are so many questions i will just focus on the balanced budget amendment. talk about what exceptions

that the ideal amendment would contain and what mechanisms for conditional? >> i ate introduced to a balanced budget amendments on the opening day. number one has a restriction that the budget balanced by a supermajority to raise taxes and has the cab of a percentage of their growth that can be spent by the federal government. joint resolution number two does not have those requirements the past the house with a strong bipartisan bill as part of

the contract with america with constitutional amendments don't go to the president after they are adopted they go straight for ratification and they have another way to bring about the constitutional amendment as they are a engaged or seeking to do right now. since it went into effect in 1789 but it is part of the constitution for them to do that. now both of the amendments have protections against declarations of war in times of national emergency footing by simple majority we cannot balance the budget this year but even by supermajority because of the

severe economic crisis we can balance the budget a particular year. the life and what goes on in the world will necessitate having those provisions that the federal government has only balance the budget of four times in 50 years and it should be the other way around. maybe there would be for exceptions because of a severe economic crisis. if that were the case we would not have a $18 trillion national debt. >> how does dynamics scoring the fact that application?

>> so dynamic scoring? >> we don't have dynamic scoring get the we are working hard because a more realistic way to look at the impact of the tax-and-spend policy would be. but i would think that dynamic scoring it would reflect upon future projected revenues and a longer term manner so if you are required to balance your budget each year you have to take into account there is some modification but not as dramatic as the long term.

>> even sensenbrenner was pressuring new to moldavia hearing with the supreme court decision with their recent case with that formula for the current status and to commit to hold a hearing this year what is the hold up if any? >> of the supreme court decision with constitutional law experts would testify regarding that. with david is very apparent is there are still very strong protection for voting rights act that the supreme court ruled on that certain states that are required by

law to seek pre-clearance of any polling places or matters like that. and the courts found the instances of discrimination were very old and there was not a justification to holds those states to a different process than the rest of the state's. there is still in section 3a process whereby individuals and states that they can bring action to find discrimination to take place if they find a state or locality has participated in discrimination with a pre-

clearance retirement -- requirement did they say you cannot with arbitrary factors. we have continued to study this issue but we have not seen a process for were that is necessary because the voting rights act is providing substantial protection in this area right now. we will continue to listen to the concerns of the individuals of people's access because it is a very important principle for the voting rights act is very important and it needs to be enforced under the of lot and we're watching closely to make sure that it is.

>> day you think there is support for legal status is for those that are here? is there other framework or a other tier get majority support of congress? also to talk about broadening the subpoena powers for the committee's chairman. with the of ranking member. >> we believe this is a good administrative tool to have that has oversight with the

many different types of investigations that the congress itself has an interest to conduct oversight of said the administration to make sure they carry out though lot as they probably should. it has been in place in other committees already to allow the chairman to issue a subpoena in consultation with of ranking member of the committee and we do not have any specific plans at this point for use of that but it is the effective tool in red major act very quickly on that. it does not preclude votes

with the way it has been done. to put into the role seriously soda order to act efficiently and effectively in a timely fashion mistake it is important for the committee majority to act and second with regard to immigration reform we're interested in reviewing and potentially taking action in all areas that we have to take a step-by-step approach in this has been made more important by the president's actions because to get much further down the road there has to be a tremendous

amount of trust restored to the american people that the immigration laws are enforced and will be in the future. of not take you through the details passing through our committee as they are revised and reintroduced and acted upon but many reforms through reinforcement system that our necessary to make it effective even with 40 percent of people suggest security of the border raid a better way to determine and a better mechanism to require those who do leave the country than we do right now. with that legal immigration

system that is a priority as well. so that appropriate status it is worthy of addressing the past to be held back because of the fact there is not just on the american people. in deciding to unilaterally act that has to be decided with careful debate to have ongoing discussions to have those who are not lawfully here and they don't have to be addressed with one large

program each has different circumstances but there is less work done in that area because there is not trust with enforcement so we have to focus our efforts on stopping the president's actions answered on legal immigration. >>. >> with that antitrust to stop a merger at that lovell is that a priority to feel those outcomes. >> you have stumped the band it is a priority. we left it out though. to be as a merger and acquisition is haphazard now

because the two different entities u.s. justice department and the federal trade commission with the antitrust issues is different and that we think is not good or promoting justice lead to different results than there for the of legislation to standardize some say that we will be pursuing. >> mr. chairman with asking for hearings on police brutality and what can be done to rein is those physicality efforts. . .