jobs, and unfair trade practices by china. the president of the ethics and public policy center talks about the obama administration decision that requires church- affiliated employers to cover birth control. and a representative from the kaiser family foundation commission on medicaid and the uninsured has details on a federal program that offers health insurance to children in low income families. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. on c-span. during this week's "question time," david cameron answered questions on the economy and on proposed changes to the national health service. operation leader david miliband -- opposition leader david miller band talked about bonuses and said the government should propose legislation asking the banks to disclose all employees earning more than 1 million pounds per year. >> order. questions for the prime minister. paul farrelly. thank you.

>> i am sure the whole house will wish to join me in sending our deepest condolences to the families and friends of signaller ian sartorius-jones from the 20th armored brigade headquarters and signal squadron too legit, and lance corporal gajbahadur gurung, attached to the 1st battalion of the york sure regiment. these are dedicated soldiers who were highly respected by their colleagues. they're courageous, selfless service will never be forgotten by our country. this morning, i had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. >> may i associate myself and all house with the prime minister's remarks? condolences to the family and friends of the two brave soldiers who have given the ultimate sacrifice in service to their country. in the past week, chief constables in england and wales have warned that policing is on an edge.

numbers fall to the lowest in a decade. the prime minister said the following during television debates. there is no doubt about it. we are not seeing enough police on the streets. we are not catching and of -- enough burglars. we are not investing enough. can i ask the prime minister, how does that square with the reality? >> the fact is the percentage of officers on the frontline has actually increased. what we inherited, we inherited a situation where there were uniformed officers performing back office in rolls. we have had to make difficult spending reductions, but he will now find they support the cuts, and they support the pay freeze, and they even so strongly support our police commissioners that droves are going to quit to try to become them. >> alok sharma?

>> tonight, the house the lab and a store to vote on whether -- has an historic vote on whether households on benefits should be able to receive more than households in work. does the prime minister agree with me that the introduction of a benefits cap should have the support of the whole house? >> i think my right honorable friend is entirely right. the cap is right and fair. it is right today. you should not get more than 26,000 pounds per year in benefits. that is 500 pounds per week, and is there because we are -- fair because we are introducing a new principle that an able- bodied family that can work should not get more in benefits than the average family gets from work. the leader of the party opposite says he is against the cap in -- not against the cap in principle. tonight, we will find out whether or not he is in favor of the cap in practice.

>> mr. speaker, can i join the prime minister in paying tribute to the officers? both men showed exceptional courage and bravery, and our thoughts are with their family and friends. mr. speaker, before the election, legislation was passed with cross party support to make all banks disclose how many people earn over 1 million pounds, but it needs the government to trigger the change. will the prime minister now go ahead and do it. >> we have the toughest and most transparent regime of any major financial center in the world for the first time ever. banks are going to publish the pay of the top executives. that never happened in 13 years of the labour government.

mr. walker said at the same time -- what themselves said it should be done at the same time, it should be done in all across the union. >> this is exactly what we expect. no leadership on top pay. in case you have not heard the news, there are more than eight people earning over 1 million pounds at our bank. >> ed miliband. >> this is exactly what we would expect. no leadership on top page. in case he has not heard the news, there are more than eight people earning over 1 million pounds at our banks. what did the chancellor say in opposition? listen to what the chancellor says it. he said this. "we support proposals to make these banks disclose the number of there in please who are on -- those employees who are on high salaries." mr. speaker, even quoted them

to -- called on them to publish their names. it is another broken promise. i am asking the question again. the legislation is on the books. it is ready to go and had all party support. why does he not make it happen? >> we are listening to the advice of the man who produced the reports for the last government. he asks about the number of people getting million-pound bonuses. let me remind him of this. it was the last labour government when he was in the cabinet that agreed to a bonus pool of 1.3 billion pat-downs. -- pounds. literally, literally hundreds of people were getting million- pound bonuses, and he signed it off. the issue for the honorable gentleman is what he is in favor now in opposition of things he never did in government? some might call its opposition. some might call it hypocrisy.

>> mr. speaker, hypocrisy is saying he will stop the bonus for stephen hester and then putting it through. i have to say to him, i think we have now heard it all, because he saysit will be led by his and his cabinet of millionaires. i do not think it is going to work frankly. let me ask him. let me ask him about another simple proposal. of he has no answer on transparency. does he agree with me that to bring a dose of realism to the decision of top pay, there should be an ordinary employee on every page committee so that -- k committee, so that -- pay committee, so that people on a

huge salary have to put at least one of their -- look at least one of their employees in their eye and justify it? >> the use of the word hypocrisy in relation to an individual member is not parliamentary. order. just before the prime minister begins his reply, i would ask him to withdraw that term straightaway. >> i am very happy to do that, mr. speaker. i think it is because we are expected to listen to the people who presided over the biggest banking and financial disaster in our history, and it is not as if they had nothing to do with it. one was the sitting minister, and the other one was sitting in the treasury. who was it that failed to realize the bank? -- to regulate the bank? labour? who was it that gave us the boom and bust? labor. who did absolutely nothing? labour? i have looked at his suggestions and do not think it is practical.

it today -- it breaks an important principle ofnot having people on the enumeration committee to have their own pay determined, so i do not think it is the right way forward, but the house may be interested to know that as i looked carefully at all of his proposals that the also proposed to ban performance-related pay in of the most exceptional -- all but the most exceptional circumstances. i think that is completely wrong. there are people working in offices and factories and shops around the country who want performance-related pay, and if they need some targets, would love to have ibanez at the end -- a bonus at the end of the year. that is for doing the right thing for your family, and it shows he does not have a clue about the economy. >> mr. speaker, now we know where the prime minister stands. no to transparency and no to an employee on the enumeration committee, and what was the chancellor during last week when they were supposedly cracking down on top they? -- top paid? he was going to davos to lobby

for a reduction in the top rate of income tax. we know the truth. we know the truth. when it comes to top pay, this government and this prime minister, are part of the problem, not part of the solution. >> mr. speaker, i do not know what the word is for criticizing someone who went into davos when you went to davos yourself. i think the word that peter used when he went into davos was "struggling." >> the prime minister is exceptionally well educated, and i am sure he has a very full vocabulary, and to make proper use of it. >> yesterday, it was announced that a french company got the first round for a contract with india. that is disastrous news or --

for herb kohl -- for car thousands of workers up and down the country, particularly in my constituency. given the long relationship between india and britain, given the fact that we give many, many times more aid to france -- to them and france ever did, the full force of the government in an attempt to reverse this decision? >> of course, i will do everything i can as i have already to have the indians look at it, because i think it is such a good aircraft. can decisions -- the decision is obviously disappointing. it is the indians are looking at the lowest bid. they have not yet awarded the contract. i will say to my right honorable friend, with the people employed in his constituency, we do not expect any job losses stemming from this decision, and yet we must go on making the case that this is a superb aircraft, and we will try to encourage the indians to take that view. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

the prime minister recently said that means testing might be brought in. for pension. was he speaking for the government, and does the prime minister really think that is there? -- fair? >> i made a very clear commitment at the time of the last election about pensioner winter fuel payments and others, and we are keeping all of those promises. >> order, order. the house must calm down. i want to hear penny mordaunt. >> interlocal super market -- if a local supermarket closes down, another quickly takes its place. if the football club closes down, pompey fans will not be content with buying their season tickets. will you meet with the club so that our club survives? >> i will certainly do that, and it is absolutely right to raise

this issue. knowing one or two fans,i can completely understand. the idea that they can go and support, it is really incredible, and we have to do everything we can to keep this friendly rivalry growing. >> ed miliband. >> this week, the british medical journal, and others, published a joint editorial that said, and i quote, with the prime minister's modernization -- that the prime minister's reorganization has destabilized and damaged one of this country's greatest achievements, a systems that and bodies justice and embodies -- embodies social justice and embodies widespread public support and value for money. we must make sure nothing like this ever happens again. mr. speaker, why does the prime minister think he has so comprehensively lost the industry's help? -- lost the mel fair -- lost in medical profession's tressed --

lost the medical profession's trust? >> people will recognize that. right. there are tens of thousands of general practitioners up and down the country who are implementing our reforms because they want to decisions made by doctors, not bureaucrats. they want to see health and social care brought together, and the want to see patients put in the driver's seat. what is happening is that the waiting times are down. the number of people for what we have put up with for 13 years is down. he should be praising the good things that are happening in the health service, rather than his policy, which was an increase in resources. that is irresponsible. that is our position. this government is putting the money in and getting the reforms right. >> every time he talks about the nhs, he shows how out of touch he is. 98% of the doctors are against

the bill. the royal college of midwives, against the bill. the royal college of radiologists, against the bill. the patients' association, against the bill. mr. speaker, mr. speaker. he knows in his heart of hearts that this bill is a disaster, and there were rumors last week that he was considering dropping the bill. he has a choice. he can carry on regardless, or he can listen to the public and the profession. will he now do right thing and drop this unwanted bill? >> if you are trying to bring into public service choice, competition, transparency, proper results and publication of results, you will always find that there will be objections. the question is will it improve

patient care and the running of the health service? >> order. interrupting the prime minister. the prime minister's answer must be heard. there is excessive noise on both sides. members must calm down. let's hear the prime minister's answer. >> let me tell him something that tony blair once wrote. there is a man who knows a thing about bonuses and pay. he said this. he said -- listen, listen. it is an important lesson in the progress of reform that changes proposed. it proceeds with a vast opposition. on popular, it comes about. within a short space of time, it is as if it has always been so. the lesson is instructive. if the lesson is right, go with it.

>> someone you knew a thing or two about reform. >> mr. speaker. >> order. the honorable member will be heard. laura sandys. >> will the prime minister agree who with main about 40 million -- agree with me and the support of his ministers that this is an enterprise zone where 40 million when pounds insures that we are still a leading center for life sciences? >> i am delighted with what the honorable lady says. it was a tough and difficult time when pfizer made that decision, but i think it shows that government and industry and organizations coming together, we have actually been able to keep a lot of jobs and investment and research and

development in that area, and with all farcical companies, -- pharmaceutical companies this government has taken thought, so if you invent things in this country, and you develop them in this country, you only pay a 10% corporation tax rate. that allows us to city -- say to pharmaceutical companies all over the world, , and invent here. -- come and invest in britain. >> last winter, to wonder people -- two hundred people died every day from preventable cold-weather-related illnesses, but instead of being able to fork is -- but it's, we had to set aside money for an undemocratic top-down reorganization of the n.h.s.. will the prime minister tell my constituents that really is an irresponsible use of public money? >> this the government has been able to take the cold weather payments that introduced before the election, and we have kept them for all the years. and think that will be a real help along with the winter fuel allowance. simply look at the figures. since the election, there are

4000 more doctors working at nhs. there are more midwives working with the n.h.s., and we are actually treating 100,000 more patients per month. that is actually what is happening in the n.h.s., he actually looks at what is happening at the hospital rather than reporting back with the trade ministers are saying. >> talks have been abandoned regarding a possible merger. the prime minister will be able to engage such as the clinical commissioning groups to come forward with a proposal that means local health needs, and also that the 290 million pounds alec guinness for hospitals is still available. >> i understand my honorable -- 290 million tons allocated for

hospitals is still available. >> i understand my honorable friend's concerns about the issues. the priority for the trust remain secure in the future of the epsom, st. helier, and sutton hospitals. >> the prime minister is keen to tell us that work should always pay. what do you say to my constituents from low and middle-income families, to convey their peers about the -- who have contacted me to convey their fears about the measures being brought forward by the government, such as the removal of working and child tax credits? these are working people who are already facing severe financial difficulty, and the proposal could cause the hard working families with disabled children with a receipt of a lower disability premium? over 1300 points per year. >> i make two points to the honorable lady. of course, we have had to reform the tax credit system.

when we came into office, even people in this house were eligible for the credit, and we have taken it further down the income scale. in terms of what she said about disability, i make two points. the disability living allowance, the key benefit, is going up by 5.2% this april, and will be well ahead of inflation, and the point i would make a but the universal credit issue is as she knows, the low rate for disabled children, anyone on the level is going to be completely protected. we have not yet set the higher rate, but i can tell the honorable lady it will be at least what it is now and possibly higher. >> will the prime minister as a matter of urgency look into a shocking report into allegations of overcharging and cases of violence and intimidation under a labour-led control?

making sure they never worked in adult social services again? >> i will certainly look at the report that she mentions. it is clearly a very serious matter. also to look into this matter further and speak weather. -- with her. clearly, they have got a difficult job to do to make sure their inspections are thorough and targeted in areas where they are most needed, and it sounds there is a very great need for this to happen on merseyside. >> cutting benefits for disabled children to almost 27 pounds, a cut of practically 50%. 100,000 children are going to be effected.

>> what is correct is anyone on that lower rate of payment, no one will receive less as a result of their move to universal credit. no one will be affected by that. >> mr. speaker, does the prime minister agree that a meaningful cap on benefits is essential if we are to end the something for nothing culture, which developed under the last government? >> i think that is absolutely right. it does introduce a new principle, which is you should not be better off on benefits that average family is on more. are they going to be supporting us tonight in the lobbies? >> are you with us, or are you against us?

a great big vacuum. >> can the prime minister explain why my 65-year-old constituents have to pay because of the housing benefit reforms prove what is the prime minister so much tougher on the honorable -- vulnerable then he is on the part of what -- a powerful their exact -- excess of bonuses? >> we know they are not going to back us on the welfare caps, and now they are against the housing benefit reforms, as well. let me just remind her what her own welfare ministers said. he said is completely unacceptable that housing benefits has rocketed to 20 billion pounds.

this is what he said. this is what he said. where is he said this. he said this. housing benefits alone is costing the u.k. over 20 billion pounds per year. this government is reforming it. opposition is doing nothing. >> does the prime minister agree that all members of the house on the side of hard working families throughout the country should vote with the government? but she is absolutely right. people up and down the country will be completely amazed that supposedly the party that meant to stand up for working people things that it is ok to get more on benefits and a family gets from working. so let me give them one more go. are you with us or are not prove absolutely hopeless.

>> it is now clearer that the single biggest funder of the prime minister's party, laura ashcroft has now told the whole truth about his connection with the building company johnson international, or is it yet again for his rich friends and another for everyone else? >> i might point out to him, the largest funder of his party is based offshore. >> there are 8 million households that have to make do with earning 26,000 pounds or less. how much does my right honorable friend think we will be sending to those people if we cut benefits? >> i think there are many

people in the country who do bent -- who to criticize the benefit cap, saying 500 pounds a week is too high. i think it is fair. i think it is right, but people have got an expectation of their politicians that we're going to make it clear that you're better off in work and you are in benefits, and there are plenty of people who are excluded from the cap because they are on disability and are not able to work, but if you can work, you should not be better off on benefits. i find it amazing that the party opposite cannot agree. one more go proves nothing. >> mr. speaker, in opposition, the prime minister on television. said if you work hard, i will be behind you. rbs has not signed up to pay a living wage.

why does his government's support low wages for workers but big bucks and bonuses? for banks? >> i cannot by standing up and working hard, and he was beginning today hang of it and that we would have a supporter. what we have done is a radically cut the bonus pool. there should not be a 2,000 lb. cash cap, unlike that massive increases under labour. >> the democrat -- this was on the first page of our manifesto. will give many working people 700 pounds per year. at a time when many working people are struggling to make ends meet, will the prime minister agree to go further and faster on the much needed tax cut?

>> we have taken 1.1 million people, some of the lowest paid people in the country. the majority of them are women, and we are committed to making further progress during this parliament with this policy. >> rosie cooper? >> before the election, the prime minister told midwives that he would make their lives easier and that he would recruit 3000 more of them. where the british people wrong to take you at your word? >> i am very sorry, but her figures are wrong. there are over 620 more there are over 620 more midwives