usable and simple. so that's our challenge and our burden to bear. so we take that very, very strictly and we would be happy to share additional information in more detail. >> thank you, mr.chairman. thanks for your leniency. i yield back. >> thank you very much. congresswoman brooks. >> thank you, mr.chairman. this past august i the opportunity to visit tanzania africa where i saw the majority of the population utilizing mobile payments. ..

in using this technology, and it was being used in the smallest shops to the large hotels so i'm curious particularly for anyone with companies with the international background how and why did that happen and what should we be thinking about and seeing that other countries and i'm talking about visiting with people in huts that didn't even have access to electricity at

times so a lot of them were charging their homes with solar power devices and so forth but how is it that africa has advanced so much faster than we have? >> the examples in africa highlights that necessity is the mother of invention. in africa at the financial the financial institutions and infrastructure for typical banking is at such a state of underdevelopment there is a need of payment remittance to find some other way to move money around and conduct commerce and so these payment solutions and other leading applications leapfrogged in such a way to create viable commerce and so i think the piece of what we learned in the country's first is to the question the congressman asked how we serve our populations and to provide

access to as many people as possible for the solutions. for us our view is that it changes everything. it doesn't tie you down to a location or place. the time of your own choosing in the services is important to you and have access on a more equal playing field and if you were tied to the time and place. so while mobile is coming into the picture, we believe our time now is to open up access to the services and solutions we can make an impact for consumers. the way we think about it as we have a large device footprint. as i've mentioned in my i mentioned in my testimony we have plans to evaluate broad ways to provide more devices. one easy way to do so is when the previous generation phones are in the market and come down the price point for consumers. in addition we know from our own

data that we have one of the highest percentages if not the leading percentage of the market as well as lower income populations and on top of all of this the way we've constructed the solution is to open doors for all payment types so we can support credit cards, debit cards, to be paid cards. we will pull out in the near future gift cards. we have any type that can be usable in our device. that's how we think about this. >> professor combined combined combined curious booktv leave the impact is going to be for this type of payment method for the -- is there greatly any burden of entrepreneurs what do you think will be beneficial to them?

xp two. as i mentioned earlier it is a boon to farmers markets and artisans and music festivals i could be had in bloomington indiana half in bloomington indiana in the arts organizations and charitable causes. i think particularly this is an enormous advantage because it will allow them to take payments they may not have been able to take before in a secure environment. and i think that we should be optimistic about the future of mobile payments and their ability to serve small businesses. >> thank you. thanks for the testimony. i yield back. >> welcome to the witnesses.

in preparing my questions for this morning testimony i have a lot of advice from people here in dc, lots of folks back home, and two of my own personal experts. my daughter and my 15-year-old son, they are all about mobile. that's all they know. in the current and future consumers, big consumers. so can you explain how your mobile technology works so i can show my dog and -- my daughter and my son. >> apparently the previous testimony was -- spirit it was good and i want my kids to understand this because the future. >> the younger population is an

important demographic to follow. what they do and what their habits are indicators of what the new consumer trends will be. what's important is the ability i think to focus their life around the services and goods that revolve around the mobile device. our view is that we want a future where consumers have the ability to pay in in-store, off-line, inside the application, say uber or a mobile context. any place you are we want you to be able to pay with secure credentials that you've loaded. so we have that opportunity as we build on the product roadmap. but it allows you to do is take a credit card, debit card or any other payment instrument, put it into the phone and make a payment at the terminal. over time, we are expected to create more consumer impact. things we can't discuss today but over time we expect the ability to pay allows us to open

the door for new innovations double-header direct impact for them. >> is there anything left after the personal identifying information after the transaction with your mobile system? >> there is no pii except you know the phone belongs to a certain user if the traditional information is there but no additional information is left. >> explained to my kids how does the paypal system work and is there anything involved after the transaction tax it's not tied to the physical device. it does involve working through an account that has to be set up to start with either via the individual themselves if they are over 18 since that's one of our rules. or by their parents. we do after a offer a student account where the parents can control with the account on

behalf of the student but there's got an initial step of setting up the account. once it is, we then have a broad network of merchants the user can access through their mobile device, through their laptop or other kinds of device. so it becomes very easy to make that payment once the initial step of setting up the account -- >> any pii october after the transaction and the paypal system? >> is something that is kept only by us so we do have the information than with the merchant. if they are shipping physical goods inevitably that means they need a physical address to ship it to but that's the extent of the information. >> into the new kid on the block, how do you envision the testing phase, and can you

explain the technology works for my daughter and son tax >> we have some people technology that will hopefully help. one of the great things we have for example is the frustrating experience when you're at the end of the transaction at a restaurant sitting there and you want to pay your bill and you're waiting for the server to come over and bring your bill, we allow you to scan a qr code without having to pay and leave. we allow you to stay in your car when it's 100 degrees in texas and pay from the comfort of your car. >> thank you. and we allow you to pay at the drive through without handing a card through the window to the person at the other end. oh and when you pay at the drive through is playing paying so that is a technology seniors will find. and pii, the other questions please ask >> do you have any transactions left over? it sounds like --

>> we do not have any financial information for the transactions these tokens in everything from a financial perspective means there is never any financial information on your phone or for anybody stored on your phone switch your phone should be taken by someone very us, nothing can be done with it played >> my time is up and my kids will be very happy. thank you. >> is there anyone else like to ask questions? >> i think each of the members of the panel for participating. this has been a very interesting and informative hearing. before we conclude, i included the following documents to be submitted for the record by unanimous consent. the statement from the electronic transmission association. a statement from the national association of convenience

stores and society of independent gasoline marketers of america and the statement from the national retail federation. does the ranking member have anything that should be included in the record? >> percent to the committee rules i would remind them thursday of ten business days to submit additional questions for the record and i would ask the witnesses submit their responses within ten business days of receipt of the questions. without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.

the british house of commons held a debate whether the un should launch airstrikes against syria. david cameron said they need to support their allies in support gave to address the threats to national security. several members countered they needed a strategy before deciding action. this particular portion features that payment is to come of the leader jeremy corbin and the parliamentary leader angus robertson. >> we now come to number two on isis the isis and a united nations security council resolution 229. i wish to call up a minister. >> i would like to move the motion on my name and that of my right honorable friend. the question before the house today is how they keep the british people safe from the threat posed by isis and this mr. speaker lets me be clear

from the outset. this isn't about whether we want to fight her for some time it's about how best we do not. i respect that the government are for political colors of the country how to fight her bosom and have to take the people with them as they do so. and i respect people that come to a different view from the government and those that vote accordingly. and i hope that provides summary assurance to the members. >> i'm happy to give way to the honorable lady. >> she is right in his opening statement saying how important it is to respect the opinions on all sides of the house, so we do apologize. >> against the honorable friends on this side of the aisle. >> i respect the people who disagree. the governments of all colors have had to fight terrorism and

i respect we are all discussing here how to fight her bosom, not whether to fight it. mr. speaker in moving this motion i think i should make some -- >> order, the pastor is not giving way. he has the floor. >> mr. speaker i. will take dozens of interventions in the time i have conscious of not taking up too much time but so many people to speak. i will give away during my speech. in moving this motion i'm not pretending that the answer is simple. the situation is incredibly complex. i am not overstating the contribution that our incredible servicemen and women can make. neither am i ignoring the risks of military action or pretending that military action is any more than one part of the answer. i am baking it clear we must pursue a comprehensive strategy that also includes political,

diplomatic and humanitarian action and either the long-term solution as in iraq must ultimately be a government that represents all of its people and one that can work with us to defeat the evil organization for god. mr. speaker not concerning all of this, notwithstanding all of this there is a simple question at the heart of the debate today. we face a fundamental threat to our security. isis has brutally murdered hostages and inspired the worst terrorist attacks against british people since seven/macs have been on the beaches and a fought an atrocity on the streets here at home. since november last year our security services flailed no fewer than seven different plots against our peoples of the threat is real and the question is this, do we work with our allies to degrade and destroy the threat and do we go after the terrorists where they are

plotting to kill british people or do we sit back and wait for them to attack us? i give way to the honorable member. >> it would be helpful if he could retract [inaudible] >> but will he be reassured? and >> no one on this side of the house will make a decision based on any such remarks, nor will we be threatened from doing what we believe is the right thing whether those products come from activists or from our own. >> i agree with the honorable gentleman. everyone in the house should make house should make up their mind on the argument in this house. there is honor and in voting for and honoring voting against. that is the way this house should upgrade and that is why i want to be absolutely clear the start of my sentence this is about how we fight terrorism and not whether we fight terrorism.

i will give way in a moment. in answering this question we should remember that 15 months ago facing the threat in iraq, the house voted 524-43 to authorize airstrikes in iraq. since then we've helped local forces to hold the advance and recover 30% of the territory they had captured. on monday i spoke to the president in paris and he expressed his gratitude for the work of the forces are doing and when they reached the border that isis themselves do not recognize, we can no longer act to defend either his country or indeed our country. even when we know that isil headquarters i give way to the honorable member. >> the amendment was signed by 110 members of the house from

six different political parties. i examined the list very carefully and cannot identify a single sympathizer. will he not apologize? >> i made it very clear this is about how we fight terrorism. mr. speaker, we process the capabilities to reduce the threat to the security and my argument today is that we shouldn't wait any longer before doing so. we should answer the call from our allies, the action we propose is legal and necessary and it's the right thing to do to keep the country safe. my view is that this house should make clear that people take up our responsibilities rather than pass them all and put up her own security in the hands of others. i give way.

>> i just returned from baghdad on a bill where isil is on the back foot and romani is surrounded. the route between muslims have been cut off that everyone on the ground tells me that unless the we attack isil and serious there is no point in liberating the rest of iraq because all they want to do is regroup in syria and come back and attack that country and our country. >> i think my friend makes an important point in its setup clearly in the un security council that the so-called caliphate exists in syria as well as iraq is a direct threat to iraq and the government of iraq. i also added to that what's happened in tikrit since that has been taken. we've seen 70% of the population returning to the city. later on in the debate i'm sure we'll talk about the importance

of humanitarian aid and reconstruction that can only work if you have good government in those towns and the absence of isil. a little bit of progress and i will take more intervention including from the different political parties in this house. mr. speaker since my statement that house has had an opportunity to ask westerns about the security experts. i've arranged a briefing for the members as well as more detailed briefings. i've spoken further to the allies including president obama, chancellor merkel and the king of jordan. the king in jordan has written in the telegraph today expressing his wish for britain to stand with jordan and eliminating this global threat. i've also listened carefully to the questions asked by members on all sides of the house and i hope the members can see the influence this house has had on the notion that stands before us, the stress on the stabilization and reconstruction the importance of standing by the allies and of only targeting

isil and not deploying operations, the need to cease-fire and a political settlement and the commitment to regular updates. i've drawn these points from across the house and put them in a motion. i want as many people as possible to be able to support this action. i give way to the honorable member. >> can i say i will be supporting him today. i do think however that he needs to joyce to the comments that were made. could i ask very specifically in relation to civilian casualties but the governments are going to do to minimize those? the gentleman raises a very important point. in iraq for the year in three months there've and three months there've been no reports of civilian casualties related to the strikes britain has taken. our starting point is to avoid civilian casualties altogether and i have argued and indeed i

will argue again today that our precision weapons into the skill of and the skill of our pilots make civilian casualties was likely sobered him being involved in the strikes in iraq can both be effective in prosecuting the campaign against isil and also to avoid any casualties as well. let me give way to the honorable member. >> i'm grateful to the minister. is he aware we have press reports that in the recent past, 60,000 troops have been murdered by isil and our allies have actually waited to attack until after those facts have taken place and therefore there is a key part in the motion for many of us which talks about how the action will be exclusively against isil. if they are involved in attacking the government troops, will we be bombing isil in

defense of the troops or will we wait by to kill those troops and then for us to bomb tax >> i would say to the right honorable gentleman the motion is exclusively the isil because that is a promise i made in this house in response to the points made from both sides of the house and as far as i am concerned wherever isil on her and can be targeted that is what we should do and let me just make this point because i think that it is important when it comes to this argument in my discussions with the king of jordan he was making a point that in the south of syria there already is cooperation between of course the jordanian government and the army but also there's there is a growing cease-fire between the regime troops into the army so they can turn their guns on isil.

that's what i decided this is a isil first strategy. they are the ones we should be targeting. this is about our national security. with the makeup of the progress that progress than i would take interventions. i want to address the most important points that are being raised in of course i will take as many interventions as i can. i believe the questions raised are these. first, could acting, conducting immensely increase the risk to our security by making an attack on britain more likely? second, does britain really have the capability to make a significant difference in third with a question asked by a number of members including light why did we just increased the honorable airstrikes in iraq to free up the capacity among other members of the coalition so they can carry out more airstrikes and forth, will there really be the ground forces needed to make this operation a success? that is the strategy for defeating isil and securing a lasting political settlement and six is very proper reconstruction post-conflict

stabilization plan? i want to try in the time i've got available to answer all of these and let me give way to the honorable member. >> i think the premise or forgiving way and there are no members of my party when it comes to fighting and dealing with terrorism and for that there will always be support no matter where terrorism is. turning to the motion could i ask the feminist or if you can guarantee to the house where he indicates the government would deploy the troops and growing combat operations if it becomes necessary i believe we have to do that would come back to seek approval? >> it's not only something i don't want to do, it's something that if i think we did it would be a mistake because the argument was made to us by the iraqi government in the presence of the western ground troops that can be a radicalizing force and counterproductive and that is our view that i would say to

those behind me that are concerned about this issue i said that this means that our strategy takes longer to be successful because we rely on the iraqi ground troops in iraq. we rely on a patchwork of army troops there are indian time we hope for ground troops fully transitional regime but all of that takes longer and i think one of the messages that has to come across today is that yes we do have a strategy. it's a complex picture that will take time but we are acting in the right way. let me make one more point before i take interventions before you get onto all these things i want to say a word about the terminology used to describe this evil discount. have you considered the strong representations made by the honorable member and i've listened to many members of parliament across the house i feel it is time to join our allies from the arab league and other members of the international community and using as frequently as possible the terminology because this is

neither a true representation of islam nor is it a state and i give way to the honorable lady. >> if we are talking about terminology, should he not take this opportunity to withdraw the remarks and he is calling those that will not be voting for him tonight for the terrorist sympathizers because they are not offensive and it is dangerous and it is -- >> i made my view clear and i think it is time to move on. let me turn to the important question and i will take interventions as i go through these questions. first, could acting increase the risk to the security? this is one of the most important he had cancer. british councils have had a briefing of the independent joint intelligence committee. obviously i can't share all the classified material that i can say this

wasn't just a different because it was close to us or because it was so horrific in scale. it's different because it showed the extent of the terrorist planning in isil and the approach of sending people back from syria to europe. this was like the head of the snake in action so it's not surprising in my view that the judgment of the chair into the intelligence committee and the director general of the security service is at the risk of a similar attack in the uk is real and that the uk is already in the top ten countries on isil's target list. so let me be clear i want to make this point if there is an attack on the uk in the coming weeks there will be those who try to say that it's happened because of our airstrikes. i do not believe that is the case. they've been trying to attack us for the last year as we know from the seven different plots our security services have fully

old. the threat levels in the uk were raised last august in light of the threat meaning an attack is highly likely. 800 people including families and children have been radicalized to such an extent that they traveled to this so-called caliphate. the house should be under no illusion these terrorists are plotting to kill us and radicalized or children right now. they attack us because of who we are, not because of what we do. >> thank you mr. speaker. we all share the protesters were -- prime ministers were to go for debate could -- horror. >> everyone in the house can speak for themselves. what i'm saying is when it comes to the risks of military action from the risk of inaction is far

greater than the risk of what i propose. next are those that ask for the strikes will make a difference. this is a question that came up. within make my argument that i will take his question. this point has been raised i believe we can make a difference and i told the house last week about our dynamic targeting, about the missiles and about 20% of the intelligence gathering work of the drones. i'm not going to to repeat all that today. but there is another way of putting this which is equally powerful. there is of course in the coalition a strike capacity. but when it comes to precision strike capabilities, whether iraq or syria last week the whole international coalition had some 26 aircraft available. eight of those were british tornadoes. it's a typically typically, the uk actually represents between a quarter and a third of the international coalitions precisions capabilities and we

also have about a quarter of the unmanned air strike capability flying in the region. as so we have a significant portion of high precision strike capability. that's why this decision is so important and i would give way to the honorable gentleman. >> he's right to sing the praises of the pilot. my constituents, his son was tragically killed in a tornado in 2012. he asked me specifically this question. will the air force in northern iraq where is the air force in northern iraq if we go into syria, does it have coalition assistance attached in the aspect? absolutely essential for the safety of our pilots. >> the honorable gentleman is right to raise this issue. we will be part of the process that already exists between the coalition partners flying in

serious debate for syria and our own. they have the most advanced defensive air sweeps possible to make sure they are kept safe. so the argument i was making is one reason why members of the international coalition including president obama and president holland who made his points to these points to me personally they believe that they will make a difference in syria just as they are already doing in iraq. >> mr. speaker, could minister -- it is important in this debate with respect to the house will depend mr. -- he must apologize for [inaudible] [inaudible] either about is an honorable vote but i do suggest that we get on with the debate. in many ways i believe i just said helps to answer the next

question some members have asked about why we simply increase the level of airstrikes to free up other coalition capacity. we have these capabilities that other members of the coalition want to benefit from it is makes if makes no sense to stop using these capabilities at the border between iraq and a syria that they simply do not recognize or respect. in fact let me make this argument. it's an important detailed point. there was a recent incident in which the opposition forces needed urgent support in their fight. british tornadoes were eight minutes away just over the border in iraq. no one else was close but pretend couldn't help us to the opposition forces had to wait 40 minutes in a perilous situation while other coalition forces were scrambled. now that sort of delay endangers the lives of those fighting on the ground and frankly does nothing for our reputation with

our vital ally. let me give way to my honorable friend. >> thank you for giving way but can you understand at the time when there are already too many aircraft that concerns many of us is the lack of a comprehensive strategy both military and nonmilitary including an exit strategy. what are the financial differences in iraq and syria you have nearly a million government personnel on the table and still we are having trouble pushing isil back. can i just ask what was the discussion yesterday but actually the minister had not addressed or concern. >> let me answer both of my honorable friends questions. the second question i think is that of which something hinojosa will want to join me and that is pushing the honorable member

while given his recent on this who is always at the committee voting on a nonparty basis where my friend and but where my friend and i disagree is i believe there is a strategy of which military action is only one part and the key answer to the question is that we want to see a new transitional government whose troops will then be our allies and squeezing out and destroy and the so-called caliphate altogether but my disagreement with my honorable friend is that i believe we cannot wait for that to happen. but it is now. we can't act as we act in iraq and doing so. let me give way to the honorable member. >> can i thank you for that change in terminology with a

feminist or join me to review that is our policy when they wrote to me to say they can use the word we are at war will you join me now to review without i agree with my friend and i already corresponded about their use of the state which is even worse. i think it's important we all try to use this language. there is a fundamental answer why we should carry out ourselves and it is where they

pump and sell the oil that does so much to help finance the act and as i said where many of the plots against the country so we must act to deal with these threats ourselves. the fact is that we are proposing different things. what practical steps can we use and what targets going against are directed against the citizens. >> the targets we go after clearly it is the leaders of this cold salt it solved. it is those that are plotting against us as i am going to argue in a minute limited actions we took and i think that

is a very important point. and if so how do we avoid civilian casualties when we have a policy of wanting zero civilian casualties and three months of these operations we haven't had any reports of civilian casualties. i'm not saying there are no casualties. of course there are. it's a difficult situation we are putting ourselves into. but it's a simple point which is will we be safer and better off if we can get rid of the so-called caliphate which is radicalizing muslims and turning people against and plotting atrocities. >> i'm very grateful to my friend for giving way. what he agree with me that there

are already hundreds of thousands of those that are burned, decapitated, crucified away from the religion those are the civilian casualties that we were trying to help. >> my friend has pitted clearly that is one of the aims we are doing to prevent this from carrying out the acts it does on a dalia basis. let's return to the question whether there will be the forces to make this a success. those that say there are not as many as we would like they are correct we are not dealing with an ideal situation but what they make a important at first we should be clear what they can achieve. we don't need them to target the supply of oil are too hip to hip headquarters that infrastructure to supply routes it is clear

they can have an effect as i said the issue so irrespective of the ground forces the ability right now to bring we should give them that support. >> how would the premise to respond to the point that since its attack it's actually changed its tactics and dispersed its forces particularly the 600,000 people over the city which make it impervious. >> of course they've changed their tactics where it was even more effective but that is not an argument for doing nothing. it's an argument for using the airstrikes where you can do

having a longer-term strategy to deliver the ground troops through the transitions that you need the argument is simple do we wait for perfection which is the government or do we stop the war now in this organization after request of the states. let me make progress into the nihilistic interventions. as i said the answer to the question of ground forces can't be achieved until there is a new government that represents all of the people. it is this new government that will be the natural partners for the forces in defeating them but there are some ground forces we can work with in the meantime and last week i told the house the explanation of the colleagues can intervene if they like and i told the house we believe there are 70,000

fighters who do not belong to the extremist groups. we cannot risk the safety of these people have been targeted dalia either regime but i know this is an area of great interest so that we try to say a little bit more. 70,000 is an estimate from the joint intelligence committee. updated on a dalia basis on a wide range of open source intelligence of the 70,000 of the majority are from the fury and army alongside the 70,000 there are some 20,000 kurdish fighters with whom we can also work. i'm not arguing it is a crucial point. i'm not arguing that of the 70,000 figure somehow ideal partners. some of them left because of the brutality and they clearly can

play a role in the future of syria and that is a view taken by the russians as well who are prepared to talk. >> thank you for the way you talk to colleagues around the house. >> is an agreement among the allies for more of a challenge but i wondered if they can update the conversation as to the shorter and longer term prospects. >> i had these conversations on many occasions was recently he had a meeting at the climate change conference and as i said before there was an enormous gap between friends and indeed saudi arabia and russia on the other hand we wanted to go instantly.

them to go instantly. they wanted him to stay potentially forever. that gap has narrowed and i think that it will narrow further. let me just make a point because i think some people worry it is a process very ambitions in the talks is for a transitional government within six months and into the new constitution within 18 months so there is a momentum behind his talks. >> will he confirm alongside any interventions that they be but maybe authorized white house tonight he remains completely committed for the huge amount of effort which has kept so many people alive in the region? >> we have had the second-largest in the world after america and at least with a vital conference we will be cochairing in london and we will bring to the whole world to make

sure we build a gap with the funding. >> if they come to the house and ask to take up out the external planning capability i think it would have commanded the consent in iraq there are ground forces in place. can i invite him to say more at the very least about what ground forces are joining us? >> it goes to another difficulty i don't think you can separate taking out the command and control of the operations against the uk or france or belgium or elsewhere. i don't think you can separate that from the task of destroying the caliphate they have created.

they are intricately linked and as long as the so-called caliphate exists it is a threat to us because it is radicalizing muslims from around the world that are going to are going to fight for that organization that potentially is returning to attack us but on the issue of ground troops as i explained there are three parts to the argument. one the things we can do without ground troops don't underestimate them and number two they are not ideal but people we are working with it we can work with more. the plan that can represent all the people there will be more ground troops to work with to defeat the caliphate. i know that takes a long time in this complex but that is the strategy which is going after the terrorists today.

>> i'm grateful that i do think the feminist or has to acknowledge the ground troops that we could work with are essential for to the long-term strategy at the moment he has been shown to be we simply create a vacuum and can i give him some motherly advice he said whoever doesn't walk with me through the divisions he would improve his standing in the house. >> i would be happy to repeat what she said. they do so with honor. i couldn't have been more clear about that. but what i would say is if that she's saying there are not enough ground troops she's right but the question for us is

should we act now. let me start some progress i just want to be clear about the 70,000 of that figure does not include a further 25,000 extremist fighters in the groups that reject coordination with non-muslims so they cannot and will not be our partners so there are ground forces and in many cases we can't assist them and then i will give way to the leader. if we don't act now, we should be clear there will be even fewer ground forces over time as it gets even stronger. we simply cannot afford to wait. we have to act now. let me give way to the leader. >> would you clarify for every member of the house the advice

that keeps being given in relationship to the forces that you speak of how many of the 70,000 are classified as moderate and how many of them are classified as fundamentalist we can never work with? spinnaker the advice i have is the majority are made up of this year he and army but of course the free cd and army has different leadership in different parts of the country. the 70,000 excludes those extremist groups we will not work with that as i said very clearly i am not arguing that the 70,000 are ideal partners. some of them have views we do not agree with what the definition is that those people that we have been prepared to work with and continue to be prepared to work with if we don't take action against now the number we can work with will get less and less and less.

if they are not acting as one of those things that will bring it about. >> i know from my time in government held a paymaster thinks about these questions but will she ensure that we complete the military aspect of this campaign if at all possible so we can get on to the important and most difficult aspect of the questions mainly the post-conflict stabilization and reconstruction because without this early stage there won't be one left to reconstruct. >> that is the end goal and we shouldn't take our eyes off the prize in the government that can reconstruct all the people. that is the goal. let me turn.

i said in the house last week was me say a little bit more about the nonmilitary elements counterterrorism and extremism, the diplomatic process and the vital humanitarian work my honorable friend referred to. it gives britannica breeds of plan to prevent and foil the plot at home and address the ideology that is the root cause of the threats we face and as a part of this i can announce today we would establish a comprehensive review to root out any remaining funding of extremism in the uk. this would be the major scale including any overseas sources. it would report to myself and my honorable friends and i will make this point before giving way again there are some that suggests military action could undermine our extremism strategy by radicalizing the british

muslims. so if we take this head on, they are appalled and these women raping monsters are hijacking the religion of islam and as the king of jordan said in the article today, these people are not muslims, they are from islam and we will stand with our muslim friends around the world as they reclaim their religion from these terrorists so far from an attack on islam we are engaged in a defense of islam and far from the risk of radicalizing by acting, failing to act actually lead to betray the religion of islam is the gateway i give way to the honorable gentleman.

>> why do they not like these people? they are taking place in his action and urging us to do the same. they are taking part in this action and urging us to do the same. the jordanians have taken part in this action and urge us to do the same. i have quote after quote and leader after leader pleading with britain to take part so we can take the fight. the second part of the strategy what we me say a word about how this process can lead to the regime and opposite edge debate co- opposition it begins with identifying the right people to put put around the table. next we expect the regime to nominate a team of people to negotiate under the auspices of the united nations created the political and armed opposition

positions have converged. we know the name groups and their ideas and in the coming days saudi arabia will host a meeting for the representatives and the united nations will take forward discussions on steps towards the cease-fire including the next meeting of the international support group for which we expect to take place before christmas. the transitional government and the new constitution and elections i would argue the key elements of the deal are emerging, cease-fire, opposition groups coming together, the regime looking at the negotiation, america and russia and the regional players like turkey in the room together and my argument is this, it doesn't hurt this process it helps the process which is the eventual goal. does the minister agree with me that the carnage on the 13th of november changes everything and

the british people would find it rather odd that it would take something more than that for britain to stand shoulder to shoulder with a number of other countries and to take on tax >> they attack us for who we are not because of what we do and they want to attack us again and again and the question, did he answer the code of our allies and closest friends in the world the french and americans that want us to join with them in our partners in this work and if we ignore that think for a moment what that says about britain as an ally in for the countries in the region that will be asking themselves if britain comes the age of france its neighbor just how reliable. let me make some progress on the vital subjects in the longer-term stabilization because i'm conscious of the

time. i said i would support the refugees in the region and the extra 1 billion pounds that he would be prepared to commit to the reconstruction and the broad international wines we would work with in the rebuilding phase people will not return if it is under an organization that in slaves in the first people off buildings, beheads workers and forces children to marry before they are even 10-years-old. we cannot separate the humanitarian work and reconstruction work from dealing with itself. >> thank you for giving way to the distance and i also welcome the use of the terminology now and i ask the premise of the question as a new member of the house for some period of time as

you mentioned on some occasions given that it would be considered unbecoming the feminist or draw on his remarks to ask >> i ex- >> i think everybody is now focused on the main issues. let me turn to the plan for the reconstruction to support the new government when it emerges. i said we would be prepared for the reconstruction. the initial priorities would become to data security, stabilization of confidence building measures including needing basic humanitarian needs such as education, health and shelter and of course pulping the refugees returned to the focus shift for the longer-term rebuilding of the shattered infrastructure harnessing the expertise of the international financial institutions and private sector.

as i said last week we are not in the business of trying to dismantle the state or its institutions. we would aim to allocate reconstruction funds against the plan agreed between the two inclusive government and the international community wants the conflict ended. i will take another one here and then try to draw to a close. >> what matters now is absent the process taking place that we are attacking the heart of this terrorist organization. will you assure the house as well as the action of the security services and policing in the united kingdom. >> what are we doing to strengthen the borders and what are we doing to exchange intelligence information and to strengthen our intelligence and policing agencies the chancellor spoke about last week all of this we should see through the

prism of national security. that is our first duty is and when you have our allies asking you the intelligence not if you can make a difference i believe we should act. .. however, prime minister has not stood with european allies in the matter of taking our fair share of refugees from this chris sis and other. will he look again at the save children request that this country take 3,000 orphan children refugee currently in europe? >> i would say we have made -- played a huge part. no other european country has given enough as much as britain has and we've also going to take 20,000 refugees with a thousand arriving by christmas, but i'm issuf to look once again a the going to take 20000 refugees with 20000 riding bike christma b