take. i explained the legal basis for the approach we take the we don't publish legal advice for well-known reasons you will be fully with. ..

>> i would say the statement from the house on the issues is not good enough in terms of information. the second question i would like to ask you is about the question of independent accountability for this action being taken. obviously the police chose someone in the line of their activity and it is automatically reviewed by the ipcc. it is a serious issue and someone independent looks at it and says was this justified. now don't you think there should be independent oversight after a targeted killing to ask what the sufficient evidence was that this person was dangerous, was it the right person in this

case, was there sufficient you know collateral damage? instead of it just being done and you coming to the house and saying we have done it there is actually some independent oversight. sorry for the long question. but it would have to be someone from the security committee and why can't you let them do that and then accountable and you know it is there. >> what i have seen is looking at the intelligence around the particular british strike i mentioned and looking around that and that is all for the good and there are other compartments that are strong n. it seems i should not be telling

what the investigations are if they want to make those investigations they should. what they can't do is look at current operations. sometimes these things are part of a total operation. a set of potential operations. and i want to be very careful not to hamper the work that is necessary to keep the country safe. i am sure they are looking at it and will be able to inform future situations. i want to meet that reservation that it could be a current operation through other people and there is a danger and investigation going on to keep action to keep the country safe. >> i think that they are not looking at it yet. they are not looking at it still. and i think the thing about current operation is we could get into a chill cross area and these kind of operations might go on many years. the point is to have a quick

look by some people who have security there with an independent oversight. so to ask you to publish the policy, and to have independent oversight afterwards, it seems like easy things for you to be able to say yes, to. and bearing in mind the progress is difficult to make and other questions are there. i would think it would make sense to agree to that second one on oversight and they are not looking at it yet. the ifc. >> they are. they are looking at the intelligence. we have agreed to that. i wrote to dominique reaves to say just that. these decisions are in no way made likely. it is one of the most difficult decisions any prime minister has to make. you have important legal advice and that legal advice and the legality of the act and the

actions we take has to be reviewed. it is not just a bit of legal advice given. it would be unthinkable to give had extensive legal oversight of these actions but that is what takes place and rightly so because these are important decisions. >> i wrote you in november and got a reply and it is amazing what these hearings can have on -- that is very kind of you. you could not get it in before christmas. but what i derive from the answer is you are not actually giving the ifc what they need to do their job properly and i want to go through what i think that might consist of.

this was a military operation, wasn't it? >> it was an operation in defense of the united kingdom to protect us against attack. you can put whatever labor on it you like. >> you received scrutiny haven't you? >> no, i haven't. i said they could look at the intelligence around it. hold on a second. we are totally engaged in an operation to defeat a terrorist organization that is intendinging to blow up, kill, and maim our citizens -- intending. that is what those people in worthington are doing and that is what the government is doing. we have focus on how we can keep the country safe. it is a current operation. it is a set of people sitting

there who are planning to try to do damage to this county and if you deny that you don't know what you are talking about. >> i am asking if you excluded the military action from the ifc inquiry? if you look at the memorandum of understanding that you asked me to refer to you will see clearly, and i have to admit the font size makes it limited, but the operations were not part of the ifc's oversight responsibility. how can we do their job and examine that specific stride if they are not able to look at the military action? >> because -- >> the question is did the intelligence -- >> these are justified

petitions. that is the question you want asked. and that depends on the intelligence we had and what their intentions were. that information is given to the ifc. the question is whether the use of the force was necessary and supported. in order to do that they need to look at the specifics of the military operation time. how can we define if it is porportional. >> you asked me whether i think -- >> you would say if we want reassurance what you are saying is the correct judgment we should not rely on what you say? [shouting] >> i said in front of the house we have taken this significant

decision and i am hear to explain. i am giving details i thought were possible on your advice in order not to give away our capabilities and i am very happy to give further answers to questions about whether it was necessary and proportiog -- pop. >> what you are giving is the pubic all reassurance about is this was the right decision. >> i think the reason for them to do the work is i cannot reveal, and should not reveal, the intelligence we have about these individual people. that will go against common sense, good practice and everything else we can think of. therefore because i cannot do that that is why we have a group

that looks at the intelligence. these people are trusted members of parliament and are not going to reveal that information publically. they can look at the intelligence and come to the decision did the government make or not make the right decision based on this intelligence. that is their job. that is why we have them. they have become stronger since i became prime minister. >> and if you conclude they cannot look at the specific military aspects in order of the operation in order to judge the porportion of the supports in this case. -- proportion. and someone concluded the work can be meaningless. >> the military operation has been described on the house of

the floor so you can ask me questions about if it was por portionat portion portioniate. i argue it was. -- proportionate. >> there are provisions to authorize you to look at the information but you have not acted on it under the legislation and that is what i am asking to do by reexamining this in order to give the public the reassurance we both agree. i think the public by and large understand the threat that we face. i think the public understand this is an ongoing operation. it is a threat we still face. i think they probably support the action we took because they see it is necessary and porportionate -- proportionate.

that is why we listen to the advice and the intelligence is examined by the intelligence and security committee. >> another aspect is peril by the fact the under the legislation the somewhat more powerful ifc, but many argue it is not powerful enough, has to rely on whauz -- what is the information they get. they can withhold information. wouldn't you now agree that all information relevant to this held by your secretarys of states will be released?

>> i wouldn't be inclined to necessarily say that is the easy thing. >> that is not so easy. >> that is why i am trying to be frank and say the stated answers, you know how i approach this -- >> we have this committee full of intelligence people in order to be able to explain. >> let me say what is my

instinct. you have to be careful with the information because it could result in someone's death. someone's life can be at risk. let me answer this. you are asking me should the government have no hold back on the intelligence it gives to the ifc. i would be worried about that because some of the information is so sensitive if it is released it could indanger the sures -- endanger the source of the intelligence.

i would rather give you a difficult answer now and have a safer country than give you an easier answer and find out we couldn't actually take the necessary action to protect our country. >> i am going to say something nice. i want to talk about the rescuing of a thousand refuges by christmas and ask how it jumped between the 26th of november that it was 252 to a 1,000 by christmas? >> i would like to wave my wand and it happen but i understand it takes time to round up. i think the minister i appointed has done a very good job. i think the local authorities

around the country that came forward. we did a huge amount of work in processing these people. there was a lot of drive to try and demonstrate with the workers. >> will you look again at the offers being made by those who wish to be part of the solution? >> i am happy to do that. i think to get off to a good start asking local authorities who could provide us with

offers. >> do you think the chancellor in germany went too far in making the offer she did for those coming into europe? >> look, i think it is this is a difficult situation. people are coming into the europe in large numbers. we had a discussion about this. we can have a discussion about other european countries being as generous as britain has been in supporting refuge camps. but germany has been a poplar destination. but it is a german -- i will leave the german politicians to

german. >> one of my concerns is the number of terrorist who might have been masking as a refuge. 10,000 fake syrian passports made in bulgeria have been seized. what are see doing to help other countries deal with this important subject? >> the things we do to make sure this is the correct information is robust. we can stop anyone coming into

our country and question them. i have given the figures we have turned away 93,000 foreign nationals and 6,000 eu nationals. but it helps if there are good and robust border controls in other european countries particularly at europe's externalal border. -- external. i think there is an impetus within the european union to do more. the fact of the last month we had a breakthrough with passenger name records. i think this speaks volumes that this security argument about how the eu can work together to try to keep the assumptions safe there is a lot more to be done. >> comments on individual cases

are there but there are concerns the leader of the paris attack and those responsible came into the country and went to birmingham through dover and went to paris. what are we trying to do to make sure when people enter the country, we have checks on entry, but this just takes one person doing this to cause a lot of concern. >> we are frying -- trying to do everything week -- we can to shore up the risk of the data and work with european partners to share that information and make sure they are doing the same thing. we think it is important to have the best of both worlds to use our own system but have the information across europe as

well. will we always stop people who want to do harm? it is vy difficult to give hat guarantee because some of the people we have been talking about are foreign nationals, some are european nationals, and i think there has been a number of european councils about this. i think there is a real impetus for europe to improve its system. people think that is just exchanging passenger information. for years it was impossible to get this agreement in my europe. it is not just the passenger names but the data like what credit card someone used and that can be critical in finding out whether someone is -- >> good work on this. >> i want to say i think this is an area of progress and an area where we need to do more and an area where the secretary is leading the charge and i think week -- we can get the best of

both worlds. >> i agree with all of that. one of the would be killers in france was a member of a terrorist group and was arrested on terrorism charges and taken to a police station, bailed out before he gave up his passport. he was written to on the seventh of november and that was 36 days since being asked to give up his passport. again taking the principle out of this, the mean to cease passports and the mean to take passports when giving bail, i appreciate the head of the

justice of the affairs committee refers to the bail powers as toothless and they need to be tougher and this must include making the immediate hand over of passports a condition of bail, and include making breach of bail a criminal offense, and it should be standard practices to notify others immediately. would you support a change in the law that would allow the police to cease the passports when giving bond? >> frankly there is more we could do here. i think with individual cases, he was limited on how long he could be housed so the police don't legally hold him while his passport was searched. his home address was searched. and if the passport was there it

could have been taken. i think the point you are making is that determining nationality, seizing passports is done quickly. -- ceasing -- i just came from an international security council looking at this. the question comes up again about why we want determine nationality and sometimes get all of the papers faster. i think we need to -- i think of another thing which is making sure information for those on bails is putting on warning list and check list and all of the rest of it and i think there is more the police can do there. do you support the work of groups like anonymous and the ghost security group who have

take down websites and twitter pages that encourage young people to go and fight in syria? do you think we should encourage the taken down of more? >> i certainly encourage the taking down of sites. i don't know enough about the groups. but i can say we do actions to take down sites and pages as the government. we are working a lot with the internet companies. major breakthroughs on child pornography and child images and searching for indecent terms. if you remember to start with they said this is free speech and we cannot deal with and then they realized they could and should. we need the conversation on extremism to make sure they are

removed. [inaudible speech] >> they came to our select committee in accept and said they were taking refuges into the communities and the net cost would be thwarted and the chancellor in statements said 130 million pounds to help with additional cost. isn't it your position that when refuges come into here we should be rehimbursed the cost? >> our authority is not quite yet that. it is submitted under the rules and forms a bases over three

years taking from up to a different amount by year five. i think bringing a thousand people in before christmas stands in dark contrast what is managed under the entire eu resettlement scheme. i encourage the councils welcoming these people to encourage them to let these people work. they have the right to work. so the faster they can become, you know, fully integrate into the community and seek a life and job the better.

[inaudib [inaudible] >> as i said, what we are going to do is have this for future years. i think the idea that they will reimburse you are for any and and every cost that arise is the right thing to do. i think the idea saying we would fund every single element of what this family does, i think that would be very hard to

arrange and local people might think that is unfair. the tariff system is not a fair approach. >> they are the ones with the packages and children being displaced from local schools. it really goes through on the health side which isn't local government. many join the school system. there is a need for english classes so they can get into the jobs you mentioned. how is this process different? >> i thought 20,000 was a

reasonable number and i think we are more than capable of delivering that. when you think about how many people come to britain as refuges in a normal here we manage. >> the local authority doesn't have this resource. >> i think in the case of the syrian refuges we are encouraging families to come forward to support them and we have a good pattent -- group of

local authorities coming forward. there is a capacity about where the housing is available and the danger of the isolation in some particularly very rural countries. but we inherited the system from the government we fought over. we have been operating it with the syrian refuges with the potential to come forward. >> so in terms of the demands -- >> i think we set out for one of those general systems anywhere. i think it is reasonable and fair. >> additional money put into health services, and additional

money for those refuges, and it is revealed to me to get this situation that is worth it. i don't think that is the best way to actually encourage the welcoming of the refuges. >> what is your response to this? >> i was with the committee in paris and internationally, legislations put into practice the outcomes of the house 21 negotiati negotiations and agreements will be. there is this conference and they did work to achieve and i think it can be broadly welcomed unless it is implemented

domestically and internationally. what do you feel about the outcome of this program? >> i thought it was pretty good given that in the weeks running up to it was looking like two degrees there were, and no review mechanisms. it was looking like a reference to progressive ambition and we struck out. it was also looking like the climate finance numbers were not going to come together. there was quite a lot that i didn't think look good. i was confidant the fact there would be a deal because of china

and america. >> i have actually lifted the weight of the european union and it would be less dependent on the coalition. this is a total example in the uk leadership. do you agree? >> i do agree. i think the uk played a key role in getting the eu to a higher ambition and the eu was able to say to the rest of the world we have got ambition in terms of the greenhouse gas reduction targets we are prepared to sign up to. and also because europe has other mechanisms in terms of carbon pricing and targets on reviewable energy and all of the rest of it. we don't have to point fingers

at the european nation and saying we are not doing enough. if you look what we did on climate finance we were leaders of the pack. the run up to paris, the meeting at the u.n.in september, and the climate conference, and you would not get the small island and developing nations to sign up. >> and what did we do with the international climate finance as well? can i ask you, one of the benefits of leadership is to turn on this and european leadership as well is there, and you can go out and get the toll on the referendum. >> i think britain's membership in the european union has

benefits where we work together for a common goal. we have the legislation put in place by the last government and put in place by me. since then, we had a revolution in terms of the last government backed in finance in terms of renewable energy. it is way to lead by example in the forums including the european union. >> let's go back a little bit then. over the last year, particularly the last year, it calls in criticism.

there is an uncertainty straight up from this and the need of the group. >> i completely disagree. i could not disagree more. totally disagree with anyone who says that on one hand britain has helped to pioneer climate change agreement and on the other hand is back tracking. [multiple talking]

>> do you disagree with the statement that the uk management and the things of the community? >> first of all the international green group that looks at countries and their commitment to climate change says britain is the second-best in the world after denmark. that is the first thing.

if you look at what is happening in terms of the deployment of wind, bio mass, and solar, 98% of the solar panels have been installed since i became prime minister. if you want to know what happens to the cost of solar it is going to be double in this parliament what it was in the last parliament in terms of our investment. solar, or offshore wind where we have the biggest offshore wind market in the world, the green investment bank is the first in the world, we are reinvesting in our nuclear program. and we are the first developed country to say we will phase out coal powered station and on any reasonable assessment you would say britain is more than fulfilling its green commitment.

and that is why uk's green gases fell by 15%. the biggest reduction in a parliament. [inaudible talking] >> and i quote directly, i will tell them to flood in and there is no likelihood of ever being -- inaudible. does the prime minister agree with nat? >> on the flooding there is no doubt we need to do more. we have seen a one in 200 years

event happening. we will do more. i gave the investment in terms of capital. >> it will never be -- >> i think the truth is -- >> ultimately it will be more of the same. >> we need to do more of everything. build more flood defenses, get better at river management, look at the way that whole drainage and area systems work, we have a cabinet meeting this morning where we discussed this extensively. i think you have a team of ministers who are absolutely on that. the military came in quickly, the money was disbursed rapidly and the flood prevention in place is there, but asking if we need to do more and yes, we do. you see the attitude change is

trying to balance the effects of nature and protecting property on the other hand and the time for that is over. this is about protecting human life. this is about protecting our homes. i want to see that continued shift. you saw that directly where this is manmade environment. it was ridiculous that rivers were not being drudged. we need an attitude change, yes, we do. >> >> >> we have a prime minister who drudges back. >> i don't think that at all.

we came into the government to make difficult decisions and a lot of departments that were established by the previous government were unprotected and due for a major spending reduction in the so-called plan. that was worth 50% cut for capital spending. we decided flood defense spending needs to be protected and what we did is increase the flood defense spending. so to answer the question do we need to look at where more needs to be done, of course we do. these are serious events and terrible for the people affected by them. it is jus not about flood defense but all of the other things and i certainly believe we need to take more action. >> it is worth noting that the refuges coming to the uk and

scotland and i have been working with the refuges in particular britain is said they want to be known for helping people. and i think people up and down the country another case you made prime minister before the action was voted on was 70,000 fighters. these new fighters, but the existing ones you were talking about. >> the 70,000 people i was talking about was the best estimate by the joint committee of the extremist opposition that is fighting against assad and daish. and to answer the question set out by the foreign affairs committee is what ground troops are available in syria to

coordinate with in terms of this campaign and that was the best answer i could provide. >> so when you spoke in the chamber, were they new or existing fighters? >> i answered saying they were existing fighters. >> thank you. >> it was a question about the ground troops available. >> >> two days ago the military of defense and independent military said british airstrikes is responsible for the death of 72-81 civilians in iraq.

civilian deaths have been recorded. is that a concern? >> the information i have is at the time we held the debate and i remember this, and correct myself if i get a wrong, at the time we had the debate after all of that action in iraq we didn't believe there had been any civilian casualties. but if people make that allegation we must look at them. >> did you look at the report that mentioned this? >> of course. that is saying we are very careful. >> of course the dealings with

the government ruling are there. but can you talk about the domestic energy project and if it will continue with carbon 21. >> they are making a massive contribution. britain probably has the most advance climate change legislation for carbon change than any country in the world. and we made good on not only having those things but meeting the budget time after time.

if you are going to do climate change, you need renewable energy, nuclear because it is base-load carbon free electricity and you have to have some gas as well and we are well on the way to delivering that energy outcome. whether it is the massive equipment we made to climate finance, the legislation actually taking in our own country and recognized by the international body that we are the second most effective country in the world for taking action on climate change we have a good record. >> thank you. >> i think he is making an important point which is if my role is to make sure we are on

target to meet these targets and deliver low carbon at the lowest cost. that is our aim. i think the point she is making is that we have important intervention in heating and transport. we have the approach we are taking with low carbon and emission vehicles. so the electric vehicles we have been subsidizing. i think we are taking the right approach to increase investment into our country. putting 1.2 billion pounds -- the problem is you have the different sectors and what we are seeing is overp over-perforn space some spaces like electricity generation we will meet the target and more. some areas it is less easy because the markets are not developing like you would like to.

renewable heat, i wish was faster. it is taking time. i wish the price of electric cars was coming down so that people could afford them easier. so you have to adjust for what is happening in the market. this is a question for how you make the carbon budgets work. reductions in the carbon is not where it comes from. i think we should be looking to see if these work in the right way. >> the confidence of my committee to receive the approval especially with the competition gives us confidence. you said the government is going to continue to invest in the technologies where they are supported. it was up to one billion pounds. but a month later it was scrapped.

it looks at one avenue of government doesn't know what the other is doing. >> that was a decision made connectively made by the cabinet. >> let me say why. i think it is important for all of this renewable energy stuff. there is always criticism and you always criticize him and why even more. if you look at solar, wind, bio mass, carbon capturing, the last government and this government have been, the last government 2010, have poured money into these technologies and we are facing big advances. but you to think as prime minister every penny i put into the technologies give -- saves a penny from someone's electric bill. >> you get to the spending review and you have to look across the pete of what we are committed to spending money on. it seems the carbon storage, while i believe in the idea, if

we can take the carbon out of gas, you can have then gas that is cheap, but the economics at the moment is really not working. billons of pounds of capital expendit expenditures. and a billon pounds we could spend on schools and on the health service. and even after you have that billon pounds that doesn't give you carbon storage that is competitive in the market. the cost will come down eventually. i think this might help the committee to understand this. you spend a billion pounds on the stores, you get to a storage capacity and it would cost you, the current estimate, something like 170 pounds in one hour.

comparing that 150 pounds, that compares with unabated gas costing 65 pounds, onshore wind costing 70 pounds, and nuclear costing 90 pounds, say. so you put the billion in you cannot spend on the flood defense and thren you have to pay 170 pounds, a full 80 pounds more than nuclear, almost more than twice as much as gas, and that would go on bill payers' bills. it seems to me the right decision is to say we will not take the billon because we can spend that billion on other projects including energy projects like making progress on energy storage.

>> in fact, in scotland they seemed to build on this from the united kingdom. >> what is happening with onshore wind is the cost is coming down. it doesn't need the expensive sub-sahar subsidy. there is going to be an increase still. all of these decisions are decisions that do put money on bill payers' bills. you have to say what is the cost and what is the benefit. >> you must meet the target.

>> we are more than meeting the target. >> the target you get with wind or -- >> we are getting a hundred >> it is four more than normal. >> the energy mix is emerging with renewables and gas will more than meet the targets we are committed to. >> very quickly, final words. >> you said that a week before that if scotland and the united kingdom exceed that it is possible. you said that on the 10th of september and we delivered on that. >> and that is exactly what the process after the referendum

had. i would suggest a lot of land is being used for renewable farms. are you very keen on channel power? we have the difficult situation around the world and i think we could increase our amount of re-newable without taking good quality land to put solar on it. >> i can see the strength of the argument for title power. one of the problems with renewables is can they divide base power. nuclear can, wind can't. the problem with this simply put is at the moment we have not seen any ideas coming forward that really can hit the strike

prices per kilo wat hour. big investments up front that can last many years but right now my enthuiasm is reduced by the fact the cost is high. >> there is definitely a high capital cost but i think you will find over a great number of years the cost of the power is naturally limited. and not inexpensive. >> we have to look at the figures as they come out obviously. as i say, i can the title has the permance -- permanence to it. there are important economic benefits. it is very exciting in terms of prospects. but you have to come back to what action i take and what that will do to the security supply,

and to the cost of the supply. so all of these arguments about renewables you have to ask yourself what that will put on the price tag. >> can i take your answer here on flooding. you came in as prime minister and unblocked this flooding bill and i commend you for it. what we want to see is if you look at successor governments is they start off with lower flood defenses and then a lot of flood goes up. that happened between 2010-2015. and what we actually need, i think, is continual support. i think, actually we have to relook at what we are doing with flooding. the 1-50 year flooding and the

1-100 year flooding when they happen every six years do we have the mapping right. that is regarding the years by a hundred. and you know that doesn't work. so i think what is your plan, what is your long-term vision, like the long term vision for the economy, what is the plan on flooding? because it seems to be happening more often? what is the plan?

>> >> landed is a flood plain but it is the big investment program and a long-term commitment.

in the other areas upstream to hang onto that any longer. and that is necessary. that is a very much of an incentive. is the much more proactive policy to bandage it so that makes very good since for that whole area. everything from upstream attenuation to farming practices to the urban areas working together.

and that has been proven and the ear of the warning systems are back up. in that attitude towards dredging has changed. that i fear if you go down to beecher -- there are many widows but in many places and then you have the two sides of the. but then to go through the work. are you convinced? >> i state it is changing.

but i had a constituency case and that this is ridiculous. but then we looked at the river bed then on the riverbank. [laughter] >> because that passes to

make the of money go on further. and then locally to do the work. >> but what was done as a review i think we implemented all of that with the right approach. >> thank you very much. but before we finish i would like to bring us back.

you find out what the security council resolution as competition is the global and unprecedented threat. had initiallabout the politics but i still have to be taken out of control as alaska iraq. with a chemical biological weapons with the argument is the army's don't succeed and be prepared to battle with the russians and americans and others. that they could roll up isis

said a matter of weeks. so where are we on the plant in one form or other does actually defeats isil from taking territory away from syria? >> but to wonder if this is the right approach but it may take longer. but it is the right strategy with the iraqi security forces. and said it will take longer and then to deploy those western troops i don't think that is the right cancer.

if you take what has happened since september the action and is 25 percent of the oil revenues. i take growing confidence we can push back if a political track is serious that relies with the moderate opposition forces but in time he went to work with the government that would go out of existence but i think it is a lot less counterproductive >> i want to raise 1.. to have that description and

of what that is like he wrote that in that personal capacity and that was justified because with the treasury committee of public affairs committee with such debt good piece of work. >> i have to remind myself. and i can assure you from what you feel.

[laughter] end to go before us. [laughter] and then the told in that capacity to have a problem with this the government hopes to reach an agreed your recommended position to stay in the reform of the european union. and if we fail in our negotiation the have to work for that position. there is a personal capacity that there is one civil service with great genius.

and for what we would like to do is for that personal capacity. >> looking around this case the government will have a recommended position of the civil servants and that is that principle in basis i make the decision. also to agree to reflect on those guidelines and to make

it easy for individuals. ed to make sure that happens quickly. between 7880 civilian deaths >> thank you very much. >> i prefer to think in

calendar years between easter and summer. that is what i am planning. >> i am always happy to. >> taxpayers

that will be able to put in >> question is for the prime minister. >> what you want? >> i have meetings with colleagues a another's and i should have further such leads later today. >> the royal college of midwives the day are going to cut state grants the college of nursing says they are concerned meanwhile a nurse said she would struggle to undertake further straining given the proposed changes. why does the prime the desert still think he is right to scrap those grants? re-read for the very simple reason we would like to see border says in trading. we believe there will be

additional ted thousand nurses because of the change because the facts are today two out of three people who want to become nurses case and because it is constraint moving to the new system now they can become verses. >> the number one responsibility of any government is protection of its people does the premier -- prime minister agree the membership of nato is under any moves to jeopardize our national security? >> my honorable friend is right is common ground that our defense policy is the membership of nato and the independent nuclear deterrent that must be replaced a updated. that is necessary to keep us safe at a time when reseed

north korea testing nuclear weapons with the instability in the world today, we we commit ourselves to nato and the independent nuclear deterrent. we have some very serious questions. >> mr. speaker this week the prime minister acknowledged the housing crisis in britain. 140 million-pound fund to transfer to around the country that is 1.4 million my math is perfect. [laughter] this monday is a drop in the ocean it will not if did take a bulldozer. what we have done is -- the

housing budget and that comes after having built 700,000 homes since becoming prime minister it have over a quarter million more affordable housing. and with the last parliament me build more houses than in the 13 years of labour government. >> mr. speaker thinking this through very carefully because every estate he announces he wishes to both those includes tenants in and people that have bought their homes under the right to buy will these people be guaranteed homes? >> of course, this is not

carefully thought through it is reshuffled. [laughter] it is and go with god it is it actually finished yet. we want to go to communities with housing is states that have held people back it degree with the local people to make sure the tenants are getting good homes they get put into new houses. locale but we have done on housing. we have reformed the planning rules. introduced help to buy they opposed it. they have absolutely nothing to say about people trapped in housing who want a star in their life. >> mr. bryan minister does not give any guarantees so there is another larger

group there is attended by the date of gerald -- gerald d. you guarantee that all existing tenants that were earmarked for be development will be housed in new housing in the community with the same conditions? >> we will but be able to deal with them unless we get them to agree independence to the homeowners and to support the communities. is a this interesting the conservative that says you have nothing better than what labor gave you. that you have the right to buy if you want to buy a home. here is hoped to save.

corby will help you out. that is politics today. or with labor opposition stick that prime minister does not seem to understand the very serious concern the council can have for they feel they are forced away from the community where they live san their children go to school and their community is so strong. but another area the prime minister may be able to help us, everyone who works hard should be able to own a home of their own. so while putting this so-called national living wage should be able to afford one of the starter homes and they will.

because instead of the starter homes have shared ownership homes. when i became prime minister , a young person needed 30,000 pounds for a deposit. >> apologize the aspires to be a states women. >> i want to hear the prime minister's answer. >> the for a deposit on a typical home because of the schemes that is no doubt it san thousand pounds. i want people to own their own homes. what we are saying to those 1.3 million of housing associations we're on your side you can buy your own

home wide use still oppose that? >> mr. speaker i hope this goes a long way because the research shows that families of the so-called living wage cannot afford the average starter home in local authority areas in england. so instead of building more affordable homes are they building them more as affordable for the housing crisis? if they are confirmed that home ownership has actually fallen? it is the challenge to help people buy. and to that is why he didn't answer the question about the 1.3 million.

he owns his home and i own my home why would we not let those 1.3 million? why not? [chanting] >> the leader of the opposition will be heard. they give for your deep concern of the housing crisis in this country. the prime minister gave no assurances to leaseholders or to those who want to get somewhere that is decent to

live. can i ask one final question? it is practical that is faced by many people all around the country. we brave about their own housing situation it in the future. it comes from attendant for the last 25 years in and she says i will eventually look to downsize to properties suitable for ages circumstances. if we downsize we have to sign a new agreement if we stay we have to pay that tax again if we downsize with is the secure hold this is a real problem that they are facing. so what advice would he give her? refers the usa is of

course, she will be paying less in rent. second dishy is concerned about the subsidy it is not paid by pensioners. the other point that i make than all of those who are in housing associations is we believe to give them a chance to buy your own home and help you to do that. >> what this exchange has shown we have a housing policy that does not support a whole would ship. yesterday there is a defense policy that doesn't believe in defense now the labor party does not believe that works for a leader who does not believe in britain next

i'm asked someone to drop in social housing to than tear down the quality with affordable homes will he sees this opportunity to make sure these new homes are attractive for well-designed places where they want to live for generations to come? >> you are absolutely right. if labor wanted to have reconstructive opinion they would say how can we help? not to rebuild their houses to help people build their own homes. that is what we want to do in that is but you will see in this parliament one side committed to opportunities to help people get on it and the other side wanting to keep people trapped in poverty. >> the economic and

intellectual contribution of the graduates is immense and. with the u.k. and scottish government to work together to introduce the formal scheme by international hire students graduating from the higher education institutions and kish tribute to to economic activity but unilaterally to rule out a without the stakeholder discussions before the report. we have an excellent scheme that covers scotland and england and wales to say to the world students there is no limit on the number of people that can steady in british universities as long as they have an english-language modification and a place at the university that is a

generous and open offer. there is no limit on the number of people back and say after they have graduated as long as they have a graduate old job. or read the united kingdom to get up in the brightest graduates to care here and work your what a great deal. >> thank you. the return of the study be said is supported is supported by the colleges and universities dollars from the 19 higher educational institutions able parties including the scottish so why do you think they are all gone if he is

right? to make for the reason i have given with the clarity of our offer. the disadvantage of the new study about we are effectively saying to people it is okay to stay with a less than graduates' job even those in their own country desperate for those jobs we don't need the world's best and brightest to come here to study then do we deal with labor jobs. that is not what the system is for. we want a system where we can advertise to the world study here and work here in a battery should keep. >> with the prime minister during the two welcome that to buy it -- to build that center to the local people

and then to respond and then to undertake a review with increased traffic by the expanding physics activities. and then did his own constituency since 2010 i take up the point really continue to attract investment if we make sure we are up-to-date statement the prime minister will be aware of what he discussed state time and age. does he feel the of rage of the generation before the fifties to be cheated out of

their pension? in a given that unanimous decision of the house to have further improvements that he will do so? benefits is an issue many colleagues have written to river there are important cases of the capital for a look carefully at the time to decide no one should suffer more than the 18 month increase in the time they were expecting to retire. also looked at what is in place starting over one hedger 50 pounds per week week, with that triple lot it is affordable for the taxpayer with an if period there just eight days they

have exceeded the in annual limit. given this medically serious news, will the prime minister ensure that the department's current consideration of expansion prioritize air pollution concern? and will he pledge never to expand heathrow airport wild nitrous dioxide levels are risking the health of millions of people? >> my friend is right to raise the problems of air quality and air pollution and. just as elsewhere in the country in one of the reasons we decided to delay the decision of airport capacity expansion we have to is the answer that question before we provide

the answer and that is what the committee recommended to this government the government will need to reexamine the commission's findings with the air quality strategies said that point is directly taken on by the government. >> but on the eve of transitional arrangements of is going to say he seems to have no idea but can he ask why they're not implementing from 1944? it then to protect the people.

>> what other european countries? we have the ability to make sovereign decisions about what we have decided to do is put in place the pension system long-term affordable for the country also sustains of basic pension and into the future. that is making such a difference to so many people. the triple lock never putsch in place that could increase that could never happen again under our arrangement. >> mr. speaker since 2010 with over to madrid new businesses with the employer rates falling below $0.1 but the 240 million-pound tell. does the prime minister agree that it is the government's stewardship of

the economy that led to the research? >> the fact is in britain today with lower interest rates, inflation in real wages are growing in people are feeling better in growing and investing in huge numbers, business investment is going up and we are confident of our future and that is based on a long-term economic plan to get the deficit down making this the country where people could run and start and expand a business for all people semipaste for years excess figures have shown a stifling 115,000 have died necessarily as a result of the cold of 43,000 tragically died last winter. do you agree that's it is

also avoidable? why does he think so many people are dying needlessly in our country and what will he do to stop it? >> you are right to to raise this the thinker -- figures are published every year the standing rebuke to all governments for what needs to be done. we have maintained that cold weather payment that will kick and also the winter fuel payments coming increase of the pension that goes up and also falling energy prices. i agree not as fast as i've been like and that is right we have this inquiry into the energy industry to make sure it is fully competitive. it has come a long way when i became prime minister the independent energy conveys that was 1 percent of the

market now they're 15 percent the big six are broken down through competition. it all changes and making sure all of those things can make a difference. >> what steps are being taken to make sure iran keeps its side of the date -- the deal? >> with secretary of state john kerry the incredible work a heated battle so true was by his side all the way through negotiating a difficult deal. we got to the adoption day that was october. since then and iraq has started to ship 12.5 gingrich uranium to russia now we're getting close to the implementation day for

this deal. to make sure it does all the things that we do it is a good deal to make sure this country does everything it said it would? >> when they push through the changes to the undergraduate funding to provide is key to the participation of higher education and. to be completely unacceptable to make that fundamental change in the committee.

>> those that were fully debated and then discussed in that house what the changes have show despite all those changes that more are taking part in higher education i am confident that will continue to be the case. >> takes for the long-term economic plan. unemployment's stands at 522. 358 positions available. to wish all businesses a recruit began to retention and.

>> i am delighted to hear. those to run jobs fares. but then 64% is taking place outside london. said they all have higher employee rates stand and did. >> with those obligations with 38 million pounds investment with my constituency does he realize it is detrimental?

when you look at this immediately. >> there was seven stages about this. this was the 50% increase and that is any country in the world in this is all good news with a renewable revolution it is extra money that we put onto peoples' bill to make that more expensive so why do we seek a balance between eight

teeth carbonizing the economy? that is what the policy is all about. >> with the number of work at the all-time low. it is not the amount of money we spend on benefits but what we tackle the root causes. >> and as far as i can see it every single problem with more borrowing and spending and with our approach all the savings will the people back. to give people more

child-care. that this is the government banned the party paul labor wants to stick you where you are. >> to be endorsed to be recommended. but that legislative consent with the constitutional crisis. why are they treating like a second-class nation and? first of all, hold the referendum. second of all the first government in its history something never done by a labor government hollywood

to make sure that is what this bill is all about. they have a proud record. but it is potentially catastrophic and other effects. we risk seeing regimes under pressure. with the nervous transfers to pay for other countries' deficits with dividends from pensions in the baking sector. with that urge a review to assess the effects of continuing low oil prices

and to work out how we can avoid the destruction of the industry in the gulf sea. >> to have a high of the beneficial effect for those to fill up their cars that is a very big increase of disposable income in basically that is good for the british economy that is a substantial effect sharing production economy. but we need to look very carefully how we could help our own industry because they come to the end he did mention one other calamity that has led to it under collapse of the policy. >> would you agree with a

despite the fax with the but the prime minister considered? [laughter] the cabinet office from the 1.6 million will lead the undertaken as dangerous? >> we have looked to this problem in this industry it read did make a series of changes including planning changes but we keep the situation under review. >> in many areas others were

hit the hardest. 1300 businesses flooded schools flooded and then there was of the dreaded going into the homes. would you agree to meet with me on how we could help the infrastructure damage with the flood defense schemes? >> we have discussed talking on many occasions and we should meet again to make some progress. but my sympathies go out to those people whose businesses were flooded many is in the constituency of that particular time of year. we will do everything we can to of communities get back on their feet with so large flood investment program

that has been projected in real terms. but i would commend that agency that was very quick to reexamine the roads or take over the repairs because they have the capacity to act quickly. that is what we need to do. this time the money was distributed faster there are always lessons to learn to get back on their feet as quickly as possible. >> order.

how is elizabeth four and shaping the race without taking a side? we have a national correspondent for bloomberg business week. this has become one of the most popular games in political circles what is it

that the senator from massachusetts wants? >> it is it clear one year ago will she get into the race or will she eclipsing in defeat hillary clinton? then she decided not to run. but that left the question who ultimately will she support? six or eight months ago it was not that big of a deal because it didn't seem like hillary clinton would have a challenge now you have bernie sanders running neck-and-neck in iowa and leading in polls in new hampshire errand someone who has emerged as a viable threat holds many positions it espouses that anti-wall street rhetoric that warner does so there is growing expectation among liberals for warren to wait in in a door sanders. >> ideologically it seems she is more closely aligned

to senator sanders. >> that's right. that is one source of frustration with supporters but look at what she has done as the senator, she has been very careful with her capital and how she has used it she has it talked about every issue, she is very careful to pick a fight because she knows she is more effective if she only picks fights she will win so she is choosing to work within the system it is very effective if. if you talk to morgan's supporters and allies but warren does not want to coster's of political capital in washington but her overriding concern in this race is if a democrat wins though white house

there she is not convinced that sanders is strong enough to be that candidate there is a good chance she could endorse every clinton but then the clinton folks would love since sanders is gaining on them. >> that did not the last month we cover the event on capitol hill where all female democratic senators except warren was on the stage with hillary clinton. >> it was of glaring absence. people around her will say is essentially as valuable as her endorsement would be to either, she really doesn't stand to gain anything by endorsing right now and could lose quite a bit sore she would endorse hillary clinton today that could be a crippling blow to the of sanders candidacy in iowa and new hampshire but on the other hand, she endorses sanders and hillary

women's she crossed herself potential sway in the future clinton administration. she is very key and a not totally quiet she has been on the sidelines but periodically will praise the policies of both candidates if they do something that she likes at the end of last year clinton said we will not let republicans attach riders to budget bills with wall street reform that is a big deal was a bit worn issue and she went out to write a glowing testimonial but the last week she went on twitter to of the schaede tweet stored in support of bernie sanders wall street reform speech. she is trying to ned's the candidates in the direction she wants them to go using the threat of potentially endorsing one of their opponents to incentivize them to support what she

would like the race to be about and she has been effective to do that. host: your piece is also available in the latest edition of bloomberg business week but based on the building numbers the you indicated, how concerned are the clinton staffers? >> i think they are very concerned. there are two signs that if you just look at the public polls and the averages that our more accurate, sanders has gone from a single digit essentials the neck and neck which is about 40 percent and his trendline is a steady move up. with the new hampshire he is leading is quite a few polls. a lot of people don't think she is at risk of losing the nomination but if you think at how inevitable she was thought to be the nominee if

he would come in to win iowa and new hampshire that would be a real blow to clinton and put enormous pressure on the list with more in to fight the cut did with the endorsement. but the other side and they're getting nervous chelsea clinton came out today to attack bernie sanders of all people a very strange line of attack and a strange surrogate. but that is a sign they are worried about stopping the momentum before he surpasses the if perhaps steele's iowa host: is the field set if she loses hypothetically could we see senator warren or vice president bided enter the race? >> i don't think so it is

probably too late to at that point if there really seemed to the party were collapsing, you could envision a scenario at the convention is sanders was incapacitated or clinton could not serve, then maybe without far-fetched scenario they would come off the sidelines but realistically this will be a race between hillary and bernie and that is why the potential of the elizabeth ward endorsement hanging out there is so large. >> you can read the details of mine. national correspondent for bloomberg business week. thank you for your time.

>> china should grow economically of course, with one or two generations everybody goes from a bicycle to the bmw. good. yes. though one child policy has helped i would be all for it but it didn't it didn't have that much to do with economic growth of the last 30 years.

>> breast feeding the it's conveniently into a health paradigm that increasingly brings individuals themselves with the soaring cost of american health care

>> this is the first

washington roundtable of the bipartisan task force to combat the heroin epidemic in the united states. bid of more than 50 members of congress republican in n democrats representing districts all around the nation. the investment does so many members have perspectives and ideas with the same enormous concern illustrates the reach of zero men into our communities. it is a national emergency to say the least we will have 10 americans died today at during the course of this roundtable. each was a brother, a son, a sister, daughter, a mother or father helpless in the grip of fear when addictions succumbing to the disease in my home state of new hampshire over 400 people died from d