and will talk about the 2010 elections with mike kinsely. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span -- our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and online. you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube. sign up for schedule alert e- mails at c-span.org. .

>> providing unique insight about the court, available in hardcover and also as an e-book. >> they did not send out one penny about where that money was coming from. when they look forward to the budget next week and ask about what we are going to do, perhaps they can have the decency to tell us what they would have done. >> now, from london, prime minister's questions from the british house of commons. david cameron defended his government's proposed budget set to be released this week. harriet harman pressed the prime

minister on the budget. the prime minister was also asked about troops in afghanistan and the future of britain's manufacturing industry. the two soldiers died yesterday. we send our condolences to their family and their friends. perhaps, today, in particular, to the doctors and nurses that worked alongside them.

mr. speaker, -- they would enjoy him that luxury themselves. >> can i thank my hon. friend for that suggestion. he knows that i share his views about the need a response to crime. the last government left us absolutely no money. what i would say to my friend is that we have to address the failures in the system, the fact

that half of all prisoners in britain are on drugs and the fact that more than 1 in cannes are foreign nationals that should not be here in the first place and the fact that 40% of them commit another crime. that is the record of failure that we have got to reform. >> >> r. speaker, can i join the prime minister in paying tribute to the commanders that died on monday in the two soldiers who died. we honor their sacrifice and we honor all of our servicemen and women that are fighting so bravely for our country. this morning, we saw the unemployment count fall. unemployment

behind the figures are real people and real concerns. can he promise that none of the policies that he will put in his budget next week will put more people out of work? >> first, i agree with the right honorable lady that any rise in unemployment is a tragedy, not least for those people desperately looking for work who want to put food on the table for their families. the figures this morning are a mixed picture. on the one hand, the claimant count is down. on the other hand, the international labor organization measure of unemployment is up by 23,000. what i can say to her is that we will bring in our work program, which will be the biggest, boldest scheme for getting people back to work, as soon as we can, and everything that will be -- [unintelligible]

honorable members should remember why we have had record unemployment in this country -- because of the record of failure that we inherited. what i can tell her is that everything that we do in the forthcoming budget will be about giving this country a strong economy with sustainable public finances and clearing up the mess left by the person sitting next to her. >> in fact, ilo unemployment is down on last month, and he should welcome that. now he has criticized our plans, but o.b.r. says this week that, under our plan, unemployment is set to fall. will he promise that he will not do anything in his budget next week that will cause unemployment to rise? we are talking about his policies in his budget. >> first of all, the honorable lady is just wrong about the figures. the ilo figures are up, and the claimant count is down. yes, they are. if she looks at the figures, she will discover that. she asked about the budget. she asked about the budget.

i have to say that i am still waiting for the budget submission from the labour party. can i tell -- can i tell honorable members why? let me tell honorable members why. before the last election, they set out 50 billion pounds of spending reductions, including 18 billion pounds of reductions in capital spending, but they did not set out one penny piece of where any of that money was coming from. so when they look forward to the budget next week and start asking what we are going to do, perhaps they could have the decency of telling us what they would have done. >> harriet harman. >> he did not listen to what i said on ilo unemployment, which is that it is down on last month, and he did not answer the question either. now he has already cut the future jobs fund, and he will not guarantee to drop policies that push unemployment up. he talks about the deficit, but how does putting more people on the dole help get the deficit down?

>> perhaps she should consider this following statement about the importance of sorting out the budget deficit, and it is this. "public finances --" honorable members ought to listen to this. "public finances must be sustainable. "if they are not, then it is the poor, the elderly, and those on fixed incomes who depend on public services who suffer most." who said that? the right honorable member for kirkcaldy, when he used to talk some sense in the old days. >> harriet harman. >> well, will he confirm, since he is talking about new politics and transparency -- will he confirm and will he welcome the o.b.r. forecast that, under the plans that we put in place,

unemployment will be lower this year and next year and the year after, and that borrowing will be lower this year, next year, and the year after -- that we forecast that. will he confirm that, and will he welcome it? >> what i can tell the honorable lady about the office of budget responsibility -- and first of all, should she not welcome the fact that these things are now independently determined, rather than fiddled in the treasury? what the office of budget responsibility shows is that the structural deficit is going to be 12 billion pounds higher, and the growth forecast that the chancellor of the exchequer produced at the time of the budget were a complete fiction.

>> harriet harman. >> i can answer his question, although, to be fair, he is supposed to be answering mine. yes, i do -- yes, i do support the o.b.r., but he will not say whether he welcomes the forecast that i set out earlier. it is clear what he is doing. he is talking the economy down, he's talking the public -- [unintelligible] he's talking the public finances down to soften up the public for the cuts that he wants to make. but does he not realize that, in doing so, he is also undermining business confidence? how can that be right? >> what the right honorable lady and members opposite have got to remember -- never mind talking the economy down, they did the economy down. they left this country with a 155 billion pound deficit, the biggest deficit in our peacetime history. they are the ones who let the banks go rip, who told us that they had abolished boom and bust, gave us the biggest boom and the biggest bust. they were the ones who told us we were going to lead the world out of recession. our recession was longer and

deeper than others. they have not told us one single penny of the 50 billion pounds that they were going to cut -- not one penny. do you know where they ought to start? why not start with an apology? >> harriet harman. >> if he thought that our spending plans were so bad -- if he thought our spending plans were so bad, why did he back them right up until the end of 2008, praising them as tough? one minute he is praising them, then he is calling them reckless. it is not so much magic numbers as the magic roundabout that he has been on. mr. speaker. mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we all agree that the deficit needs to come down, but will he promise that in the budget next week he will not hit the poorest and he will not throw people out of work? does he agree with us that unemployment is never a price worth paying? >> the figures were wrong, and the jokes were not much good either. never mind the magic roundabout, what we are all enjoying on this side of the house is the labour leadership election, although it is by day

beginning to look more like a star trek convention. what the -- what the -- beam me up! what the honorable lady has got to answer is -- before the election, they set out 50 billion pounds of cuts, but not a single penny aligned to a single program -- not one pence of the 18 billion pounds they were cutting from capital spending aligned to one single bit of capital expenditure. so before she starts challenging us about cuts, they should first of all apologize for the mess they have left. second of all, tell us where the cuts were going to come to under their government. and third of all, recognize that the responsible party, in coalition, is actually dealing with the deficit and the mess that they left behind. >> sir alan haselhurst. [unintelligible]

>> despite the huge satisfaction felt in my constituency at the government's decision not to proceed with the second runway at stansted airport, is my right honorable friend aware that blight and uncertainty still overhang the communities closest to the airport? will he look to see if other measures can be taken to provide them with longer-term assurance? >> can i first of all say what a pleasure it is to see my honorable friend being able to speak about these issues for the first time in many years. i am sure he will do so often and with great power from the back benches. he is right to say that we are very clear in the coalition agreement about stansted airport. i hope that removes some of the blight and uncertainty. i will certainly bear in mind what he had to say. >> andrew miller.

>> during the general election, the conservative party distanced itself from remarks made by the right honorable member for rushcliffe when he spoke about government aid and said that it had nothing to do with vauxhall. will the prime minister take this opportunity to remove the uncertainty not only for vauxhall but for sheffield forgemasters and all the other companies that are waiting for support in relations of properly constructed agreements? >> everyone wants to see vauxhall succeed. it is a very important company, employing many people in this country, not least in his own as he knows, a 270 million pound government loan guarantee to support gm europe was announced on march 12, 2010. we are reviewing commitments made since january 1, 2010.

projects that are good value for money and consistent with the government's priorities will go ahead. but let me say to the honorable lady and others who are shouting opposite that we have to be clear that there were spending announcements made by the previous government before the election that do need to be reviewed. to take just one example of one scheme operated by lord mandelson's department, the so- called strategic investment fund -- when we looked at the money provided for specific projects, we found that over two thirds of the constituencies involved were marginal labour seats. so it is right to examine these, but i say to the honorable gentleman that proper grants properly made for proper reasons will go ahead, but fiddled grants for political reasons should not. >> stuart andrew. >> the 16-year-old son of my constituent, lorraine fraser, died after a vicious multiple knife attack incident six years ago. one of the murderers is trying to use the law to reduce his tariff after serving only five years, and another avoided conviction altogether by fleeing the country. would he agree to look into this case on behalf of my

constituent and meet her to hear about her plight and about the excellent work she is doing to defeat knife crime in this country? >> i hear what my honorable friend says, and i would be happy to meet him and his constituent. we need to take knife crimes in this country incredibly seriously. there has been a huge increase in the carrying of knives, and we have got to put a stop to that. on lenient sentences, the power introduced some 20 years ago to allow the attorney-general to appeal against lenient sentences -- i am not convinced that power is used enough. we need to look at that again and make sure that in cases in which people feel that a lenient sentence has been put in place, there should be an opportunity to increase it. >> john woodcock. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the defense contracts for astute class submarines signed in march were long negotiated and are essential for our security and for thousands of manufacturing jobs in my constituency and across the uk. will he honor them? >> first, may i welcome the

honorable gentleman and say that i know how much his constituency depends on the work going on in the submarine yards in barrow, which i have visited and where i have seen the building of astute class submarines and the submarines carrying our nuclear deterrent? i know how important that is. we do have a defense review under way. that defense review has to include the astute class submarines. but everyone -- and to those who call from opposite, let me just say that the labour party was committed to a defense review itself. we asked whether it included everything, even aircraft carriers, and the answer came back yes. it is no good trying to bicker now that you are in opposition. it is right to have a defense

review. it is right that we consider such things. but i know how important submarine building is to barrow and to the defense of the nation. >> david evennett. >> members opposite might revere regional development agencies, but is my right honorable friend aware of the considerable amount of money wasted by some rda's, particularly on unnecessary expenditure on entertainment? will he confirm that, to get better value for taxpayers' money, he will take action on rda's? >> my honorable friend is right, and i know that a lot of argument and discussion is going on about regional development agencies. the figures about how much money has been wasted, however, should be more widely shared. the east midlands development agency paid more than 300,000 pounds for offices in north america. the northwest development agency shared an office in newport beach. one northeast spent money on offices in china, japan, korea and australia. s.e.e.d.a., the south east england development agency -- the chairman of it spent 51,000 pounds on taxis and executive cars in one year alone. we need proper control of costs and spending. there has not been any for the last 13 years, and there sure is going to be under this government. >> margaret hodge. >> can i tell the prime

minister about my constituent, nikki blunden, who is 37? she has a son aged four and is dying of cancer. her consultant wants to prescribe the new drug lapatinib, which could prolong her life. last week, n.i.h.c.e. deemed the treatment not to be cost- effective. will the prime minister stick to his promise not to hide behind n.i.h.c.e., and ensure that the primary care trust funds forthwith this nhs treatment? nikki blunden cannot wait. i ask the prime minister to act. >> i am grateful to the honorable lady for asking that question. my heart goes out to her constituent, nikki blunden. we want to see these cancer drugs get to patients more quickly, without the bureaucratic wheels taking so

long to turn. that is why we are establishing the cancer drugs fund. i will discuss with my right honorable friend the secretary of state for health how quickly that can be done. i want it, if possible, to be done this year rather than next year. if it can be done, it will be, and if drugs can be got to people like your constituent -- we all have constituents in such a position -- i will do everything that i can to make that happen. >> mr. douglas carswell. >> the prime minister knows that i am always and everywhere for referendums. could he tell the house, though, why he is planning a referendum on a.v., which was not in the manifesto of either coalition party, but not a referendum on european integration, something all three main parties were recently promising? >> what i can promise my honorable friend is that we will have such legislation on the referendum lock, so that it will not be possible in future for a british government to pass powers from westminster to brussels without asking the british people first. seems to me that is absolutely right. the referendum on the alternative vote was part of the coalition agreement, and he will be free to campaign on whatever side of the referendum he wants. that was part of the agreement that put together this government, which i believe is rolling up its sleeves and sorting out the country's problems. >> jim dobbin. >> about 1.5 million people

suffer from involuntary tranquillizer addiction as a result of medical prescribing, and it totally ruins their lives. will the government consider investing in cost-effective, supportive, long-term withdrawal treatment programs to enable them to lead normal lives, come off benefits, and go back to work? >> let me praise the honorable gentleman for his interest in this work. i know that he is chairman of the all-party group that deals with this extremely difficult issue. the last government set up a review of addiction to prescription and over-the- counter medicines. we are waiting for the report to be come out and will study it carefully when it is. let me make two points. first, i think that there is a problem in our national health service more generally, in that we spend too much time always treating the symptoms rather

than necessarily going to the causes. we could probably reduce the level of painkillers and tranquillizers if we did more through physiotherapy and other therapies to deal with the problem in the first place. secondly, all addictions need proper attention, and proper treatment and therapy, to rid people of their addictions, whatever they happen to be. i am sure that the report will mention that. >> sir alan beith. >> will the prime minister respond positively to the uplands inquiry by the commission for rural communities -- which reveals the great value and potential of magnificent hill areas such as ours in northumberland -- by stressing the need to ensure that hill farmers have an adequate income, and that there are rented homes, apprenticeships, and services such as broadband to enable young people to stay in those areas? >> i will certainly look at the report carefully. i have every sympathy wwth what

the right honorable gentleman has said. upland landscape is as beautiful as it is because it has been farmed for centuries, and we need to recognize the connection between beautiful landscape and active farming. we want our countryside to be a living, working countryside, not a museum. so i will look at that point carefully. one extra point is, i think, in terms of housing. we must also recognize that the top-down target system was not working. our plans in the coalition agreement to let communities decide more, including villages, if they want to put in extra homes. that is a good way of helping to keep the pub, the post office, and the local shops and schools open, and i hope we can proceed with that work. >> mr. elfyn llwyd. >> even as we speak, i am sure the prime minister and his team are seeking to make savings and cuts, hopefully without affecting front-line services. may i commend to him one way of saving 7.2 million pounds a day? bring the troops home from afghanistan. >> i have to say to the honorable gentleman that i just do not agree with him. i think that if we brought the troops home precipitately -- if

we did it straight away -- not only would we let down our nato allies, not only would we let down the afghan people, but we would create circumstances in which the taliban would return, and the danger of terrorist training camps in afghanistan would come straight back. i know that what we are doing is dangerous and difficult, and it is costing us dearly. i am acutely aware of that. however, i think that we must put our effort and our shoulder behind the wheel of the obama- mcchrystal plan to make sure that it works as well as it can, and accompany that military surge with a political surge, seeking a political settlement to get taliban fighters to put down their arms and reintegrate into afghan society. that is the way in which to create some stability in afghanistan -- never a perfect democracy, but some stability -- in which case, our troops can come home with their heads held high. >> miss anne mcintosh. >> will the prime minister join me in paying tribute to all who work for the health service, but will he also examine the circumstances in which patients

are often discharged from hospital only to be readmitted very soon afterwards? will he also look at the continuous health care which has become something of a postcode lottery. will the prime minister examine that as well, to ensure that such care is paid for on the basis of clinical need? >> i think that one answer will do. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the one answer that i will give is this. i know that there is a big problem with hospitals discharging patients, sometimes to meet their own targets and financial targets, but not thinking of the longer-term consequences if those patients have to return to hospital. that is why my right honorable

friend the secretary of state for health has announced that hospitals will be responsible for patients not just during their treatment but for the 30 days following their discharge, so that we can better link health and social care to ensure that people leave hospital at the right time, in the right way, and for good. >> mr. stephen hepburn. >> siemens are proposing to close trench uk in my constituency and to transfer its production to france and germany, despite the fact that trench uk has a full order book, healthy profits, and is exporting all over the world first-class products. would the prime minister meet me so that we can discuss that illogical decision which could lose the uk a jewel in manufacturing? >> i would certainly meet the honorable gentleman. i know how frustrating this can

be. siemens is a big investor in my constituency, too. the jobs that he is speaking about are exactly the sort of high-tech, high-skill jobs that we want to keep in this country. so i will certainly meet him, and we will do what we can in the budget to ensure that we have in this country a tax regime, support for apprenticeships, and support for training that will want to make businesses locate and stay and invest in britain. >> mr. adam holloway. >> every household in gravesham has inherited a sort of second mortgage of debt. can the prime minister give us some idea of the level of debt per household across the country? >> my honorable friend is entirely right that every single person in this country is now carrying 22,000 pounds of debt because of the mess that the last labour government left us. the fact is this -- if we do not do something about it, by the end of this parliament, we will be paying 70 billion pounds in debt interest. that is more than we spend on schools and more than we spend on defense. it would be a tragic waste of money. that is why, however painful, we have to get to grips with the deficit that we were left by the last labour government. >> barry gardiner. >> can the prime minister explain why the changes to local government funding last week mean that, in witney in oxfordshire, they will see an

uplift of 1.7%, while children in brent will see a loss from their education budget of 1.88 million pounds? can it have anything to do with his minister for local government's statement last week to the house that "those in greatest need ultimately bear the burden of paying off the debt?" >> i am sure that the honorable gentleman will welcome the fact what we are going to introduce, which is a pupil premium, so that the money follows the poorest children in the country to the schools that they go to. that is what is going to happen. that is what he should support and i will look forward to him supporting it when it comes. >> mr. graham brady. >> as he strives to restore sanity to our national finances, will my right honorable friend also give a word of reassurance that the budget next week will seek to encourage and support those who save and provide for their own future? >> my honorable friend is entirely right. we have got to make sure that, in what we do, we actually help those who try to do the right thing, to save and to look after themselves and their families. the first thing that we have to

do is keep control of inflation, to keep the bank of england independent, to make sure that the budget supports the tough approach on inflation, which is the worst thing for savers. the second thing that we can do is make sure that we do not discourage saving by having so many people reliant on a means test. that is why we are committed to linking the state pension back to earnings. but what i would say is this -- there are no easy ways of reducing this deficit. some people believe that it can be got all from one area or all from another. i am afraid that it is going to be a difficult task. we will do everything we can to take the whole country with us. we will need to have a responsible debate about how we do it, but it has to be done for the good of our country. >> luciana berger. >> thank you, mr. speaker. in the past week, i have been contacted by students and parents in my constituency who are devastated to have been told that geography and politics courses at liverpool john moores university have been cancelled from september, giving them less than three months to make alternative arrangements. alternative arrangements.