car or whether it's the largest economy in the world trading with the rest of the world. we do it every day. and at the end of the day, what we want is a fair deal. i give you something, the benefit of the bargain is i get something back. any country that wants access to our markets needs to play by the rules. we can't allow cheating to hurt our workers, their wages, our businesses, or our economy. and the american people get it. that's why they are so apprehensive about any trade deal this congress puts before it. because they want to know will we lead on their behalf or are we going to let the special interests dictate the rules? will we retreat from our responsibility to make sure that if some foreign companies have access to our markets they are going to play by the rules? when i take a look at this trade promotion authority legislation, i ask myself, how can you ever

get a good trade deal out of this when the rules are rigged against america? one simple example. everyone agrees we have had a bipartisan consensus in this house more than 230 members have signed on to a letter in the past saying we got to stop countries that manipulate their currency to try to make their products produced by their companies look cheaper than american products. yet this legislation would prohibit us from going after the countries that are cheating to prevent the companies in those countries from cheating. so how are we going to stop the companies that we know are pirating, they are stealing, that are cheating against us, how are we ever going to stop them if the rules require us to go through those countries to try to get those companies to abide by the rules? when the country is cheating, i guarantee you the companies are going to cheat. and that is not the way you get foreigners to access our market. we can do much better.

we have to do much better because the american people want us to lead not retreat. that's why we should vote this down and get a better deal that the american people know and feel is right for america. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i'd like to yield two minutes to the distinguished majority whip, mr. scalise, from louisiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. scalise: i want to thank the gentleman from wisconsin for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor. mr. speaker, american trade is critical to strengthening our economy and giving america -- american workers the competitive advantage that we need so we can go out and sell more of our goods around the world. there aren't many impediments for foreign countries to bring their products into our country and sell their goods here, but there are many many impediments when we want to sell our products that we make by american workers to foreign countries. especially in asian countries and european countries. those countries right now, our allies around the world, want to

get good trade agreements, good level playing fields so that we can have good negotiated trade back and forth and sell more of our products into those countries. right now china's writing the rules. while america sits on the sidelines. we are not a country that sits on the sidelines, mr. speaker. this bill gets us in the game so america can go out and our workers can compete on a level playing field and we can sell more of our products overseas. but something else that this bill does, mr. speaker, is it actually gives congress a direct say in the process every step of the way. we lay out criteria, things that cannot be in trade deals protections against immigration and global warming type issues being included in these trade deals. but also gives transparency, strong and enforcible rules so that any agreement that's reached would have to be available online not just for us to read, as members of congress but for the entire nation to read for at least 60 days before there's even a vote in congress.

and then of course congress would have the ultimate veto authority over a bad deal if it was sent. this bill is critical to getting america back in the game so our workers can be competitive. when america competes on a level playing field, we win. let's go create those american jobs by passing this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time, please? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 17 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from wisconsin has 22 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. levin: why don't -- let mrs. dingell go. she's up there. it's my special pleasure to yield one minute to the gentlelady from michigan, mrs. dingell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from michigan is recognized for one minute. mrs. dingell: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you very much, mr. levin. mr. speaker, the vote today is why i came to congress.

i promised the working men and women in my district that i would fight to make sure that they had a seat at the table when we were making decisions that impact their life and their livelihood. we all know that we must grow our economy. and we must compete in a global marketplace. we all know what great products the american worker builds and that we can outcompete anybody in the world. but we cannot compete with the bank of japan and the bank of china. nafta cost us one million jobs and michigan is still paying the price. the korea free trade agreement was a great deal for south korea. they have expanded their imports into this country by almost half a million products. and we worked to just get 20,000 into that market. enough is enough. congress cannot abdicate its responsibility to the working men of this country.

it's our responsibility to protect our workers, fast track doesn't allow this. we should not pass it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the distinguished member from illinois, mr. davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, chairman ryan. i understand the importance of trade and the impact trade negotiations can have on our local economies. even back home in illinois. currently one in three manufacturing jobs depend on exports. one in three acres on all american farms is planted for hungry families overseas. as a congressman it is my job to make sure trade agreements protect american workers, farmers, manufacturers, innovators and service providers by opening markets around the world. because when given a fair playing field, i have the utmost confidence that american companies and industries can outcompete foreign competitors. but too many times past trade agreements have left our industries, especially steel,

vulnerable to unfair trading practices like dumping. i will continue to fight for stronger trade enforcement and be committed to protecting american jobs and i want to thank chairman ryan, subcommittee chairman tiberi for their leadership on this issue and i thank my colleague from illinois, representative mike bost. mike and his tireless efforts to strengthen our trade laws to protect american workers and more than 2,000 workers at our steel factory in granite city, illinois. i yield back the balance of my time. and urge a yes vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. pt gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i'd like to yield three minutes to a senior member of the ways and means committee, dr. boustany from louisiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for three minutes. mr. boustany: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the distinguished chairman of the committee as well. i believe all of us here in congress can agree to the evasion of anti-dumping and

countervailing duties is a serious problem that needs to be addressed and that's why i rise in support of this bill because i think it thoroughly and thoughtfully addresses the issue. my seafood industry in louisiana has been particularly hit by this. which prompted me to work with industry, the committee, and others in the administration to come up with a legislative fix tore a growing problem. thankfully the bill before us today contains language from my protect act providing tools for customs to help out our legitimate importers and distributors and trade affected domestic industries to prevent and combat fraud at our border, not after the fact which makes it much more difficult to deal with. specifically, the the language is dedicated to preventing and investigating evasion. within that unit, there will be a point of contact for private sector violations, who have the authority to direct these investigations and the duty to inform interested parties.

they have to inform the interested parties about the status of the investigations. we have increased the types of data that customs can use to target evading imports and this language will increase information sharing between the department of commerce and the international trade commission to effectively investigate evasion. a finally the bill sets requirements to train its personnel. these are necessary improvements to stop fraud before it gets to our borders. i could tell you, i have gotten plenty of comments from folks in my district, the owner of blue water shrimp company says the language creates provisions we need. we need these tools. and if we do not get the bill, the whole bill does us no good whatsoever. these tools are essential to effectively combating evasion.

evasion is too important a problem to remain unaddressed and we will get the best possible agreement on this when we go to conference. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this piece of legislation. let's move the ball forward and strengthen our laws to combat evasion. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. the gentleman from michigan continues to reserve. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from california. mrs. walters: i rise in promoting t.p.a. and i thank paul ryan for his leadership. t.p.a. is not to be confused with t.p.p. which would put congress in the driver's seat. it would ensure that the president is held accountable to congress and the american people in negotiating all trade deals. t.p.a. a public document which i have read and is available for

the american people to read, in fact, it's right here, would require the president to make public any free trade agreement before it comes to congress for a vote. trade is a vital part of our economy. one in five jobs is supported by trade and 4.7 million jobs depend on trade in california. right now, american companies cannot compete on a level playing field. trade barriers make it difficult to sell goods to the 95% of consumers that live overseas. free trade agreements would put in place fair and strong rules for u.s. companies to compete and win. if congress fails to pass t.p.a., china will. we simply cannot see our role as a global leader in the 21st century. i urge my colleagues to rally behind t.p.a. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, mrs. sanchez.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. sanchez: i rise to express both strong concern and guarded optimism about the customs bill before us today. i will be voting against the underlying bill before us today because of drastic and unnecessary changes the bill makes to t.p.a. providings relating to human trafficking currency manipulation and immigration policy. however, i remain optimistic that the customs provisions in this bill can be strong during conference. senators worked on a bipartisan basis to reach an agreement after nearly a decade of negotiation on how we should be enforcing our trade laws. i'm now hoping that house republicans will be part of getting these provisions across the finish line. one of my biggest priorities has been to combat the duty evasion by foreign producers that undercut american industry here. foreign companies avoid paying

duties they on goods they import into the united states. for the first time, it feels that we are getting it done. i want to thank representatives tiberi and chairman ryan for discussions on the best way to get this done in conference. i hope we will be working on a bipartisan basis to get a final bipartisan house customs bill. giving up the opportunity real teeth to enforcement procedures would not only be harmful but sends a message that this congress doesn't care about them. by increasing our customs security measures, we can ensure that american companies that play by the rules are not undercut by foreign competitors who cheat by evading duties on their goods. i urge my colleagues to work to improve this bill by incorporating language with some key, u.s. manufacturers have waited long enough to have

customs enforcement that works. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i yield one minute to the distinguished member from iowa mr. king. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: i thank chairman ryan for yielding and thank him for the leadership on this issue. and i would point out three things that trade promotion authority needs to pass t.a.a. needs to pass and customs bill has to pass. the chairman could not have been better i laid two issues out in front, one, my concern would negotiate global warming climate change and the strong things that go beyond rumors of the immigration provisions into the future trade agreements that would be negotiated under a trade promotion authority. we addressed those issues. the language in the customs bill is language that is tight. i have confidence in it. it says it shall not obligate

the united states to grant access or expand access to visas issued under 8 u.s.c. 1101-a-15. this satisfies my concern. enforcement is a concern. we are committed to stand together and we are hopeful that and expect that the president who we also anticipates will sign this bill, will abide by the provisions in it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 30 seconds. mr. king: and we expect and confident that the president will abide by the provisions in it. we will follow through on this part of this bargain and this congress has the opportunity to veto. what a wonderful thing it is to go into a trade promotion authority circumstance and know that for the next six to nine years, the u.s. trade representative will not be negotiating global warming or immigration. we preserve that for the united states congress, as the constitution directs. so that level of confidence

let's us then focus on the trade agreements that are good for the economic growth of the united states of america. that's what's in front of us here today. and i'm grateful we have gotten to this point. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, a member of our committee, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. blumenauer: i'm frustrated on the floor today to not vote for h.r. 644. this should be about helping businesses, export more, cutting red tape at the border and enhancing the ability to hold foreign tax cheats accountable. this bill cuts corners on matters to exporters and those undercut by bad actors and give special attention to the paranoia of the republican caucus. the senate passed a bipartisan customs bill which had a couple

of strong provisions that i have offered, in it. this legislation is not what we are considering. this bill contains ill advised language on climate change and shorts efforts to deal with human trafficking and currency and reverses long standing policy towards israel. it's not so much the fact that there was these vote-buying tactics to load this up with inappropriate items, i'm frustrated that provisions that would strengthen the bill and get bipartisan support, have been left out. the green 301 provisions to help american businesses working abroad who are put at a competitive disadvantage by operating at or above local environmental laws while native companies get a free pass, when it comes to following what's on the books. it's not fair and there should be an avenue of redress.

the green 301 would have done that. and i had a trade enforcement provision that i have offered up that we've attempted to get through here. it's in the senate bill. i will be fighting in conference to make sure that these provisions are protected in the senate. we have a customs bill that's worthy of support and some of the goofy stuff gets stripped away. i will vote for t.p.a., but i'm really frustrated that we don't have a customs bill that we all can support. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i would like to yield myself time to engage in a colloquy with the gentleman from ohio, mr. turner. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. turner: mr. chairman despite a long standing policy against the use of offset agreements many foreign governments continue to use offset agreements and result in loss opportunities for americans

workers. offset agreements and military sales contracts are add-on provisions that require u.s. companies to invest in foreign countries and chairman ryan, under t.p.a., how will the federal government curb foreign country's use of offsets? mr. ryan: i agree that offset agreements distort fair trade. congress will negotiate to seek more market access for u.s. companies and reduction, elimination or prevention of trade barriers. these provisions will direct the president to seek to curb our negotiating partners insistence on the use of offset agreements. mr. turner: i thank the gentleman for his response and i look forward to working with him on this important issue. i yield back. mr. ryan: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield one minute to

the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: many this morning have said t.p.a. will protect american jobs. in rhode island, we know that's not true. t.p.a. will facilitate another bad trade deal that will result in more american jobs being shipped overseas. those who think it is good should come to rhode island and meet the men and women. i have listened to former jewelry and textile owners in woonsocket pawtucket and providence who don't understand why congress is considering another trade bill. my state lost over 40,000 jobs after nafta, mostly in manufacturing. haven't we seen the devastating impact? haven't we learned our lesson and doesn't include enforceable provisions on environment and labor. it's a bad deal. we need to compete in the global economy. of course, we need to grow our

economy but do it in a way that protects american jobs and workers. we need fair trade not just free trade. i urge my colleagues to vote no. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized and has 15 1/2 minutes and minority has 11 1/2. mr. ryan: i yield to a member of the steel caucus, mr. boston, one minute from -- mr. bost. mr. bost: everyone needs to compete on the same playing field and same rules. products are important. we must have effective laws that protect the companies and workers from foreign companies who cheat. this includes -- this includes nations that illegally dump into

our markets. under our current trade laws, american companies like u.s. steel in southern illinois, must suffer long-term harm before remedies take effect. you know, that's like waiting until the house burns down to the ground before you call the fire department. doesn't make sense. that's why i'm pleased that we are voting on the enforcement bill today which includes language that my friend congresswoman rodney davis and i introduced to combat these illegal trade practices. this legislation speeds up the process and helps companies like u.s. steel respond to illegal dumping before it causes serious harm to the company and its workers. i encourage my colleagues to support today's bill and protect our businesses and workers from unfair trade and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i yield 1 1/2 minutes

to the gentleman from indiana. mr. messer: i rise in support of trade promotion authority because i'm a conservative who believes trade creates jobs and opportunity. in my district, farmers grow corn and soybeans and sell them all over the world. factory workers like my mom, build faucets, cars and caskets and sell them all over the world. trade allows that to happen. when the american worker gets a chance to compete on a level playing field, we win. that's why we need trade agreements. the truth is under the policies of this administration, paychecks are shrinking. for many workers there is more month than money as they struggle to pay their bills. killing this legislation does nothing to help those workers t would only make their situation

worse. trade related jobs pay better. when 95% of the world's population lives outside the united states, we can't afford to pull up the draw bridges and shut out the rest of the world. that's not smart policy and it won't help the american worker. let's grow our economy. let's secure good-paying jobs. and let's make sure the american worker leaves this century just like we -- leads this century just like we did the last. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: continues to reserve. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the distinguished house majority leader, the gentleman from california, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, the majority leader, is recognized for one minute. mr. mccarthy: before i move forward i want to thank the gentleman. he has shown true leadership in working, working with everybody in this house.

any time you take a large piece of legislation, there are concerns. i have never seen another member of this house sit with more meetings, more concerns, and try to find a solution. i thank the chairman for that work. mr. speaker, earlier this year when i was headed home to california from d.c. one weekend, i saw something very troubling. something actually today we can solve for the future. you see, it was february and there was a labor dispute. it was a shut down on our ports on the west coast. so as the plane descended instead of seeing the beaches stretched throughout california or the santa monica mountains, my attention was drawn to the number of ships sittle idle into the ocean and the number of ships sitting in the port. you see, the docks were shut down and our economy was halted. when americans cannot have their products moved to willing

buyers, the men and women who were part of the creation do not receive the rewards of their efforts. in california we could not afford to waste any of our resource especially what we have short supply of of water. so when the trade was shut down, the food that was produced throughout the century valley would rot on the docks. what was most interesting to me mr. speaker, i remember a phone call i got just another weekend after, it was the president of the republican freshman class here. he had just done a town hall and he's from colorado. said, mr. leader, i got a big issue in colorado. the ports of the west coast are shut down. you see, my small businesses are hurt by that. they are hurt when we are not able to have trade. i remember a big bipartisan press conference we had, republicans and democrats alike the largest one i have ever been a part of in the pressroom. talking about the ports being

shut down because every single run of their districts were effective. especially the small businesses. when we cannot trade, our economy suffers. our way of life suffers. in fact, during that same period of this crippling shut down, our economy actually shrunk. today what we are talking about on the floor is trade promotion authority. it allows us to get to an agreement. you know we have not had it for a few years. so what's happened around the world while the rest of america sat idle? there have been 100 trade agreements. 100 trade agreements around the world that we would want more of our small businesses to be a part of. you know how many we were a part of during that time? zero? because we did not have t.p.a.

trade is different between rotting produce on the harbor docks and sending california goods around the world. trade is the difference between the lines of prosperity and the times of stagnation. we have a unique opportunity today. it's not a trade agreement, it's an opportunity. an opportunity that will empower each and every member of this floor. to have input, to have transparency but what's more important, to empower every single american to make sure they are now at the table. that when the next trade agreement between countries want to engage, america won't be left out, america can lead once more. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. nadler: thank you mr. speaker. i rise in opposition to this bill. all the trade agreements since nafta have been sold on the same propaganda. they will increase our exports and jobs. and the results have always been the same. they have multiplied our imports, ballooned our trade deficits hemorrhaged our jobs, and depressed our wages. now we are asked to vote for fast track agreement that will say we cannot amend any trade agreements, only vote them up or down. even as they like their predecessors lack any means of protecting our workers from competition with workers who are paid 30 cents an hour and assassinated if they try to form a union. we know there will be a provision for private corporate tribunals that can invalidate our regular laces. it is our constitutional duty to regulate foreign commerce not -- and trade agreements, not take them on a take it or leave it basis from the executive branch. it is our constitutional duty to protect the american sovereignty

against foreign companies in validating our laws through private corporate tribunals. we must vote no on fast track to allow congress to do its job to see the next trade agreement doesn't hemorrhage our jobs, doesn't ignore currency manipulation doesn't validate our consumer labor, and environmental laws. we must say no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time mr. speaker, i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from florida, mr. car bellow. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. car bellow: i thank the chairman for yielding and his leadership on this very important matter. mr. speaker, we are biths of an impassioned debate on trade promotion authority, trade adjustment assistance, and trade enforcementment we are hearing arguments from our colleagues on both sides of this issue, from both sides of the aisle, and mr. speaker, i am honored to serve as the voice of my constituents from south florida who directly see the impact of

these free trade agreements every single day. mr. curbelo: the united states currently has 20 free trade agreements, 11 of which are with countries in south and central america. miami is often called the gateway to the americas. and i'm proud to represent a diverse and proud community that has seen the positive impact of free-throw. -- free trade. workers in florida create goods and services used throughout the world something only possible with free trade agreements. congress must pass t.p.a. so the united states can open up new markets. since 2007, there have been over 100 agreements signed on a global scale while our country has sat idly by. mr. speaker -- additional 30 seconds. mr. ryan: additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for additional 30 seconds. mr. curbelo: i want the american people's representatives to have a strong hand in negotiating future free trade agreements and this t.p.a. bill ensures this

will happen. it provides unprecedented amount of time for the agreements to be read and ensures proper safeguards are in place for congress not the president to drive the agenda on the negotiations. mr. speaker, i encourage a yes vote on t.a.a., t.p.a., and trade enforcement. if anyone has any doubts as to whether t.p.a. is good for our country, i encourage you to visit south florida. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair notes that both sides have 10 1/2 minutes remaining. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. boil. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania. is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. boil: thank you. mr. speaker, i am not going -- mr. boyle: thank you. i am not going to speak long as i have lost my voice. if we pass fast track the american workers will lose their voice. this is wrong. the president has said the

social mobility and imcoin equality is the issue of our time. if i really believe that anything we are voting on here would do anything to address that, i would sincerely be voting yes. but it doesn't. after 20 years of nafta and cafta and every sort of trade agreement, we have not seen our middle class benefit. let's finally use this time to rebuild the american middle class and stand up for -- i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i'd like to yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from the other side of the aisle, from virginia, mr. connolly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. connolly: i thank the distinguished chairman. today's vote is about america's future. who will shape it? it is not shaped by a recitation of grievance. it is not shaped by making trade a symbol of all that we find bad in economic progress. it is by seizing that future and

shaping it and that is what t.p.a. does. it pries open foreign markets. it sets american rules setting. it allows us to frame the issues. in 40% of the world's trade and economic activity. we have never had an opportunity as important as this one to shape the global economy to our advantage and to those of our trading partners. we must not lose this opportunity. the grievances are legitimate. the concerns and fears are legitimate. but we must look beyond them. we must address the future for future generations of american workers. i support the bill in front of us and urge my colleagues to do the same. again i thank mr. ryan for his courtesy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time do we have left? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 10 minutes remaining. the gentleman from wisconsin has 9 1/2 minutes remaining.

mr. levin: i yield for a unanimous consent to mr. sherman. mr. sherman: i ask unanimous consent to add to the record the chart showing we have a $100 billion trade deficit with our f.t.a. countries. those are the official statistics of the u.s. international trade commission. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's now my distinct pleasure to yield one minute to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. ellison. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mr. ellison: members, trade adjustment assistance should not be a sweetener a trade in coin, trade adjustment assistance should be what we do no matter what. it shouldn't pave the way for trade breaux motion authority. it is important -- for trade promotion authority. it is important and good to stand with dislocated workers who are basically pushed off their jobs because of bad trade deals which we have been pursuing for 40 years. but yet here we are today told

we got to vote for this trade adjustment authority which does not include public sector workers, which is smaller than it should be, we have to support it because the only reason we are here to support it, the only reason we have been lobbied by no less than the president and three top cabinet officials is because they know it paves the way to trade promotion authority which is what they really want so that we can literally members, give up our constitutional duty. where are my constitutional conservatives when you need them? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin blfment ryan: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin reserves his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield now to my colleague from michigan, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my friend and colleague mr. levin, for yielding.

i come from flint, michigan. flint, michigan, which was the birth place of general motors a place that put the world on wheels, and in the last couple of decades has seen 90% of our manufacturing jobs go away. now, true, not all of them lost because of bad trade deals, but many of them were. and bad trade deals have exacerbated that job loss and has ruined many parts of that community. i support as virtually all of us do expanded trade. as a way of growing the u.s. economy. i'm a member of the president's export council. this is something we have to do. but this t.p.a. is not a yes or no question on whether we should expand trade. this t.p.a. is flawed. it fails to address the most significant trade barriers hurting american manufacturers. it fails to address currency manipulation by our trading partners. if we don't address the most

significant barrier, how can we expect any trade deal to have the effect? all we have to do is look to the performance of past deals that have similar flaws and we can see why we have failed. if we are going to engage in expanded trade, we have to do it right and a way that deals with currency -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. kildee: deals with environmental obligations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from mr. meeks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. meeks: today's vote to grant the president trade promotion authority is about america's future in a globalized world. let's be clear what's at stake. america's standing as a global leader has not come without strong leadership from this body and will not be sustained if we

act out of fear rather than on fact. the most basic fact is that nations around the world are fighting through trade agreements for every advantage they can get for their economies and their workers. it then raises the question if we don't pass this agreement, who will set the standards of trade? will it be us or will it be china. if this bill fails, it will be china. the bill before us today is a bipartisan effort to ensure that trade deals negotiated by the executive will be guided by congressional directives to reach the highest, most transparent and progressive standards ever required by law. this bill should have the support of any member who cares about the enforceable labor and environmental standards promoting the rule of law, greater congressional oversight and greater transparency for the american people. we are also considering trade adjustment assistance, a program that democrats have promoted to provide income and job training.

t.a.a. should pass. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i reserve. mr. levin: both of us want to be sure of the time. so tell us, if you would. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin has 9 1/2 minutes and the gentleman from michigan has seven minutes. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the speaker pro tempore: who claims time? mr. ryan: i yield three minutes to the chairman of the trade subcommittee, mr. tiberi from ohio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. tiberi: thank you for your leadership on this debate, about american leadership. we are here to dwight three bills today trade assistance for displaced workers, trade promotion and accountability authority that inserts congress and the president's ability under the constitution to

negotiate a trade agreement with anybody he or she wants and timely customs and enforcement. enforcement is critical, ladies and gentlemen. this bill i'm so thrilled and honored to introduce here in the house. this is a key bill as part of trade. and far too long we haven't had as good enforcement as we need to have. and i'm committed to that. let me just mention one thing. trade deficits, trade surpluses we have 20 countries that we have agreements with, trade agreements with, 20 of them. two of them happen to be on our borders, mexico and canada. you take out energy we import from them and rather import it from them than anywhere else in the world. we have a trade surplus with those 20 countries a surplus, in manufacturing. my dad was in manufacturing.

mr. levin heard this 1,000 times, my dad lost his job of 25 years. i lost my health care as a kid along with my sisters long before nafta. globalization began occurring after world war ii. we can either engage or dis engage. when we disengage, we lose. when america engages we win. we can outwork anybody. what trade agreements do actually is break down barriers so we can compete. and then we have to have the enforcement piece. but ladies and gentlemen, that's what this is about. it's about breaking down barriers. my state of ohio has been devastated by globalization. my dad's job before nafta was devastated by globalization. 48 countries in asia have had trade agreements with each other. for the last 10 years we are

party two. we are being left behind. we can compete if we break down barriers. that's what we need to do today. trade assistance, insert congress and the president's ability to negotiate, because he already has that ability. this doesn't change that. this inserts us. this inserts slow track, whatever that agreement is, in asia, in europe. 60 days in public before the president can sign it. 60 days. i wish i had six hours, six hours to review the affordable care act before i had to vote on it. this is 60 days members will have an ability to look at what was negotiated. if we don't like it, we'll vote it down. we have the constitutional authority to do that. this is about jobs. vote all three bills, yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from

illinois, mr. lipinski. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mr. lipinski: i rise today in strong support of american workers, american manufacturing and the environment and strong opposition to t.p.a. t.p.a.'s woefully inadequate when it comes to stopping currency manipulation, enforcing labor standards and environmental protection. this is exactly the wrong time for congress to be giving up its authority, which is our quints' ability to have a voice on trade deals. this is not labor versus business. countless manufacturers across my district oppose this. ford motor opposes this because they saw past trade agreements have been a bust and they are grateful concerned about the massive t.p.p. enabled by the

t.p.a. will kill more american jobs. we need fair trade and american workers will win but that is not what they are being given. it is time for congress to stand up for the middle class and american manufacturing and stop passing bad trade deals. vote no on t.p.a. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: 6 1/2 minutes on the majority side, six minutes on the minority side. chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: let's reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. ryan. mr. ryan: this reminds me of the song "are you going to believe me or your lying eyes"? and when you come from the part of the country that i represent you see what happens to these trade deals.

adelphi, we'll be lucky if there are 2,000 workers. an auto plant, germ motors, down to three or four. we have countries shipping products to the united states their final product lands on our shores and it's the same cost as the raw materials for the american company. that is not free trade. that is not fair trade. that is a raw deal for the companies in the united states and the american workers. and let's even say these trade agreements are good for the economy, as many people may believe. you still need immigration reform. you still need a transportation bill. you still need investments in research and biosciences and renewable energy. and i can't believe that some of us are voting for this and not getting any of those other

things implemented. vote no. no. no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin continue to reserve? mr. ryan: i yield two minutes to the member of the house ways and means committee, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. reed: i rise today, mr. speaker, in strong support of trade. it is time for us to lead. when you open up markets to our manufacturers, to our workers, you are creating jobs here on american soil. i'm a firearm believer in u.s. manufacturing, mr. speaker. i co-chair with my colleague from ohio, the manufacturing caucus. we are seeing a renaissance in u.s. manufacturing. we are driving utility costs down.

we are creating an opportunity where u.s. manufacturers are coming back onshore. and what do we need to do? we need to create markets. 95% of the world's population lives outside of america's borders. 40% of the world market is represented in the negotiations that's going on with the trns pacific partnership. why in the world would we not lead and negotiate an openness and fair level playing field for our american workers and our american manufacturers? it doesn't make any sense. i ask my colleagues to join us, join with us to open up these markets so that we can create the jobs of today and tomorrow where we make it here to sell it there. that's what this is doing. that is what trade is all about. and when we have rules-based trade, our workers our

manufacturers win. so i encourage us not to get into these petty political fights and have some type of litmus test as to who's on whose side. stand with the american workers and american manufacturers, open up the world markets to our rules-based system and i would gee at the end of the day we all win and america will win. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield -- as i understand it, mr. clausen hasn't gotten time. so i yield to you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. clawson: fairness for everybody, including american workers. since leaving my career in the auto industry, i often run into

folks and now they work at c.v.s. or the t.s.a. and they say, mr. clawson, any chance the plant's going to open back up? i'm having a hard time making ends meet and paying for my kid's college education and unfortunately, i can't give them much hope. if those plants close because of lack of american competitiveness, i can swallow hard and i can accept. but when those plants close because of currency manipulation which is an after thought today, then i don't accept it. and my sadness for this unemployment turns to hardness, which is where i am today. this is not about american competitiveness. this is about getting a chance for world class manufacturing facilities who eliminate jobs. i say currency manipulation no

way. i say t.p.a., no way. i say vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: may i inquire as to how many speakers are left on the other side? mr. levin: we have one and i'll close. mr. ryan: same as us. i yield one minute to the distinguished chairman of the house rules committee the co-author of the t.p.a. bill mr. sessions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. sessions: i thank the young chairman from wisconsin for his hard work. mr. speaker, before we pass t.p.a. today, the law is that the president of the united states can negotiate whatever he wants without negotiation, with the congress and just go do it and come and plop it on our doorstep. i disagree with that. and that's why we are doing

t.p.a., trade promotion authority where the house of representatives maintains its constitutional prerogatives and is empowering through t.p.a. any president, whoever the president is for the next seven years, to go negotiate in some 150 parameters as they negotiate. and we maintain our sovereignty in this bill, including additions that we said that the president can't go negotiate a new global warming trade bill, chimet change. we -- climate change. he cannot negotiate anything new on immigration. steel and other things. we are giving the president our authority and expecting him to negotiate therein. this is a good deal for the american worker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's my real pleasure to yield one minute to our

leader, nancy pelosi of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you very much mr. speaker. good afternoon my colleagues. today, we have a very important decision to make in this congress. i join with the speaker in acknowledging the hard work that so many have put in on this important subject. i want to thank the president of the united states and his administration for being available with their cabinet officers and the rest to explain to us how they see what is in the trade -- the t.p.a., the fast track what the prospects are for the transpacific partnership. i want to thank our friends in labor, environmental groups, faith-based groups, who have expressed their opposition to so

much of what has been presented all of which will be constructive as we try to move forward with a better trade promotion act fast track. . . we all understand we live in a global economy. some of us as i do represent cities built on trade, the city of san francisco. i grew up in a city where the famous clipper ships brought product to and from our shores in baltimore, maryland. it's a great exciting prospect for expanding markets for our products and having u.s. global leadership. i was hopeful from the start of all of this discussion that we could find a path to yes for the fast track legislation that was being put forth. some bumps in the road along the way. some potholes along the way. unfortunately i think cold as

well. that doesn't mean that that road cannot be repaired. i just believe that it must be lengthened. each week each of us goes home to our districts. and in the case of many of us, we put our hand on a very hot stove. we hear the concerns of so many families who have financial instability and uncertainty. some of it still springing from 2008. 2008 where they were threatened with the loss of their homes, jobs pensions, savings, inability to send their kids to college. all of it undermining the american dream. as the economy has improved and the leadership of president obama still middle class economics have not fully turned around the country because of

consumer confidence that people must have in order to invest, to spend, to inject demand into the economy is simply not there. so my concern about all of this it's about time. it's about time. why are we fast tracking trade and slow walking the highway bill? it's about time. people have not recovered from, again, 2008 sufficiently to again have consumer confidence to turn around our consumer economy. and so i think that today we have an opportunity to slow down, we all know we have to want to engage in trade promotion and the rest of that. but we have to slow down this road. it is not -- whatever the deal is with other countries, we want a better deal for america's

workers. another element that i'm concerned about is the time that is running out for us to do -- rein in the consequences of climate change. i want to just talk about myself for a moment and i'm bragging. i told myself second to none in this body on the subject of protecting the environment and recognizing the challenges of climate crisis. when i first came to the congress, when president george herbert walker bush was president, he signed my legislation which is now called the pelosi amendment to the international development and finance act of 1989. and that said, that said that any of our directors on any of our multilateral development banks had to have an environmental assessment made and made known to the indigenous

people who are affected by whatever development was there and made known to the world. the connection between the environment and commerce is inseparable. and for over 25 years the pelosi amendment has been in effect. when i became speaker my flagship issue was energy independence and climate. i speak from some authority on this subject. the son of george herbert walker busch, president george w. bush, signed the energy build of 2007. we worked together to find alternatives to fossil fuels. he wanted nuclear. i wanted renewables. we have one of the -- very successful energy bill of 2007. done under the auspicious of the select committee on climate and energy independence that i established as speaker which has been abolished since then. pope francis in another week will be announcing his

initiative on climate. while this is all going on while school children know that this is a challenge that we must face to protect our planet. people will join us and say this is god's creation and we have a moral responsibility to be good stewards of it. in this bill today, the customs bill that's on the floor right now, it prohibits the ustr from negotiating on climate change. how could it be? 25 years ago the pelosi amendment was passed because we saw melting snow in regions where the snow is melting. areas as big as united kingdom burning in the amazon. 25 years later and we are putting in a bill that the ustr cannot negotiate on climate change. can you not separate commerce and environment. while i salute the president, he has been magnificent and courageous, going out there and

making the fight for america's leadership on climate change, he has been great. he has an agreement with china which is almost -- could not have been foreseen except for his leadership and the cooperation between our two countries. so it's not that he isn't doing his part. it's that congress, again it's about time. slowing down our response when is we should be proactive. and yet fast tracking, fast tracking legislation to do that. what's interesting is we in the house, are we labeling ourselves the lower body and giving new meaning to that term? or the senate to have opportunity for amendment after amendment if their colleagues gave them the vote? but in this house, fast track the fast track. no chance to amend any of it.

just vote it up or down. i find that unnecessary. unacceptable. and one place we could go to have a discussion on how to improve the fast track legislation. but at the same time the republican majority is allowing in the customs bill amendments to the fast track bill. this amendment on climate, other amendments on immigration. and they were spelled out by mr. sessions earlier with great pride. amendments to fast track in the customs bill. but no amendments for democrats. again i don't see how this congress can ignore that. i don't see how this trade agreement can ignore it. much has been said about security issues. they are involved in this agreement. that we have to make a geopolitical case for this trade

agreement. of course we always have safety of the american people as our first responsibility. their security is what we come here to protect. but how could it be that we are allowing, again -- let me say it another way. i have been very prayerful about this. pope paul vi, another pope, mentioned francis earlier pope paul vi said if you want peace work for justice. economic justice, and i don't see that happening in this fast track bill. lifting people up in the rest of the world. or having trade agreements that do not increase the paycheck of american workers. that should be our first order of business. environmental justice looking at these prohibitions on dealing with climate and 11 other

countries in the world, and then our own. now, again, i commend the president because in the fast track bill there are some good provisions on the environment. issues. i'm talking ethic, a responsibility, a competitive view of the future. -- comprehensive view of the future. the pelosi amendment addressed the indigenous people all these people who will be not of the first, shall we say, priority for many of these countries as they make their economic decisions. and on the subject of security, last year 16 former three and four star generals and admirals who serve on the c.n.a. corporation's military advisory board released a report, 16 former three and four star

generals said that climate change is a catalyst for conflict. climate change, they said, will have an impact on military readiness, resilience both at home and abroad, and they limit our ability to respond to future demands. we have rejected fast track before. after nafta president clinton sent a fast track bill to the congress, and it didn't even have enough votes to be taken up. the second time, it was rejected. when we had majority in the house, we did not have fast track for president bush. when people say this is the first time a president -- isn't so. we instead under leadership of mr. levin and mr. rangel, instead we had the may 10 agreement. with the basic principles of how we should engage other

countries. that is part of, and thank you mr. president, that is part of what the t.p.a. has as its goals, but we are dealing bilaterally one country at a time. this is a multilateral agreement with 11 other countries. 12 countries and growing. and we need, we need to slow this fast track down. i think it is possible. now, one of the questions that arises is the question of the trade adjustment act. most of us have not only voted for this, been champions of it over time. i was one of the first issues i dealt with when i came to the congress. speaking about myself again. it's really important but as some of my colleagues have said, our people would rather have a job than trade assistance. trade adjustment assistance. i talked about that red hot stove that people put their hand on when they go home.

mr. cicilline talked about his district. mr. norcross about his. mr. boyle about his. and the list goes on and on. how do we say to these people we are here for you you are our top priority when the impression that they have is that this is not a good deal for them. but it can be. i'm hopeful it can be. so while i'm a big supporter of t.a.a., if t.a.a. slows down the fast track i am to vote -- i am prepared to vote against t.a.a. because its defeat sad to say, is the only way that we will be able to slow down the fast track. now i understand there will be some manipulations here one way or another what bill comes first, what can come up, what can't, but the fact is this. the facts are these actually,

that the -- if t.a.a. fails, the fast track bill is stopped. they will take up the vote, as they said they would not, they may take up the vote, but it doesn't go any place. it's stuck in the station. and for that reason sadly because the senate has sent us the bill that way connected, sadly because the fast track passes will need t.a.a. trade adjustment assistance, sadly i would vote against the t.a.a. and i just wanted you to know where i was coming from on that. for these and other reasons i will be voting today to slow down the fast track to get a better deal for the american people.

bigger paychecks. better infrastructure. help the american people fulfill the american dream. i thank mr. levin, again, for his leadership, and i thank all of our colleagues who have worked so hard on this really on both sides of the issue. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. the chair would note that there are 3 1/2 minutes remaining on the majority side. three minutes of debate remaining on the minority side. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i reserve, but i didn't catch the last part. how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: 3 1/2 minutes for the gentleman from wisconsin, three minutes for mr. levin. mr. ryan: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i'm ready to close. today the votes on t.a.a. and t.p.a. are combined and we did not do that. the republicans did so to win votes for t.p.a..

so they used t.a.a. as a bargaining chip. i don't support their doing so. as someone who has been a lead sponsor of t.a.a.. voting no on t.a.a. gives us a better chance to get all of these issues right. you know throughout my career, i voted on lots of trade agreements and i voted for most of them. i negotiated a few of them when ustr would not do so. it's mentioned we democrats are responsible for the labor environmental standards and, very importantly, access to medicines that we worked out with difficulty also on may 10.

so we democrats built the foundation and i don't -- and we don't want to see it eroded. language in bills isn't enough. it's what will happen in term it's of the implementation -- terms of the implementation of that language. i want to say just a few words about jobs. because it's often said, we've lost those jobs they've gone away, so therefore don't worry ? there are millions of jobs in this country that are in danger of being lost if we don't do trade right. that's why we need to do it right. and i think t.p.a. essentially puts t.p.p. on a fast track

when it's on the wrong track. it's on the wrong track. there are negotiating objectives, they're so vegas they don't really -- vague they don't really mean anything. we put forth a very, very important alternative, a substitute bill that laid out instructions on each of these 10 or 11 issues, whether it was worker rights, i can go down the list currency, environment, investment, access to medicines automotive market access rules of origin, tock to tobacco controls, state-owned enterprises, agricultural market access, food safety. there's been a response to none of these. so as someone who believes in expanded trade we have to do

better and to fast track t.p.a. is on the wrong track. i urge a no vote on all of these bills. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin, with 3 1/2 minutes to close. mr. ryan: mr. speaker let me make two points. this is about bringing transparency and accountability to government. we're not considering a trade agreement today, we're considering a process by which we consider trade agreements. that's what trade promotion authority is. and this process we're saying, you've got to let members of congress see the negotiating text, you've got to let the country see a trade agreement once an agreement is reached. and you've got to follow congress' rules congress' direction. that's what this does to make sure that the executive branch

>> he is a reporter with politico and he reports on hills and legislation on capitol hill. adam, we just saw on the house a lot of action on the trade deal. the adjustment assistance not happening in the house but the tpa passing. what happened here? adam: basically, there are forms for all these trade bills that

house republican leaders should put together. the role is that in order to proceed to the fast-track bill, the trade promotion authority built an affair customs bill, they would first have to vote on a trade adjustment renewal bill and that basically gives job-training benefits to workers who are displaced out of their jobs with trade deals. that vote failed and as a result , the other two votes were voted on as a symbolic vote but they did not actually pass those bills. >> do you know anything about the behind-the-scenes, back and forth and why they decided to take that the love again? adam: basically, this morning the president came to the capital to the caucus and urged his democratic constituents to

vote for taa. not despite -- not to spy but he said you have supported it in the past so you should not vote for ta to defeat tpa but the democrats really disregarded what the president had asked them and voted against taa and basically to block tpa. basically, the path forward is they will come back next week and probably early next week in the first two or three days of next week and vote on taa again under the same role. that will basically -- they will be able to use the votes are tpa which passed and they will be able to use the vote on the customs reauthorization bill which also passed but they can

kind of personal -- preserve those victories but they will have to bring back taa. the question is, how are you going to get summary democrats to reverse their votes? i think there is a lot of skepticism that that will work. he said, there is still a lot of room in our caucus and the republican caucus to get that taa vote passed at a big anyone is under an illusion that it will be pretty difficult even if they bring the boat back up to pass it. >> and you mentioned the customs enforcement bill that passed 240 -190. why does it go on to senate? >> because they are going to amend the customs bill. and the whole plan originally was to not have to conference

the tpa ville -- bill. they want to get back to the president as soon as possible because they're basically to wrap up that deal where that would be necessary -- that trade promotion would be necessary in congress so they don't want to waste time getting that to the president's desk. basically, the one second life the senate on a few points in the house and onto the customs bill. to basically preserve that bill from having to go through second procedural steps. >> and up and a ball of this too, this is essentially available the president because he has been really lobbying for all of this trade package. what does that say about his power and also the minority leader's role nancy pelosi? >> i think the minority leader has been -- today was actually the first day you heard her and

her position on these bills. she has withheld any sort of judgment on these bills publicly and she has not said which way she would vote for them and she has had conversations between the white house and the cabinet and members of congress that she calls getting to a path to yes. you saw that she ultimately sided with the majority of her party on this and voted against it. but the president and his cabinet have been lobbying these bills for a long time and they have been sending cabinet members up to the health for meetings and the president himself has engage directly with members via phone calls and other ways even taking people on

trips. he took a number of members to the g7 in germany. people who claim their support but all of that, as you saw, did not result in the result that he wanted. >> we appreciate it. we will keep following you. that isbehfudi >> today hillary clinton officially kicks off or 2016 presidential campaign with a rally in new york city. i live coverage begins at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> here are some of our featured programs this weekend on the c-span network. on book tv on c-span2, tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern, kiersten powers says that although they were once champions, the roles are now against tolerance and

free speech. on sunday night at 11:00, former deputy director of the cia michael morel on the successes and failures of the agency's war on terror and the current fight against al qaeda and isis. on american history tv on c-span3, tonight at 9:15, author on the strategy behind president nixon's supreme court appointment and the impact he had on the court and american politics. and as a night at 6:00 on "american artifacts," revisit the national museum of american history to visit restored murals from the talladega college. and the founding of talladega college. yet our complete schedule at www.c-span.org. >> wednesday in the british house of commons, prime minister david cameron gave a statement on the outcome of the recent g-7 summit in germany. following his remarks, he took questions on combating isis, i'm

a change efforts, and trade with the united states. this is about one hour and 10 minutes. >> statements of the prime minister. david cameron: that -- at the summit, i believe we made progress. first, on economic security, we reached important agreements on trade, global, green growth and corruption. on trade, i was determined to progress the trade deal with other g-7 countries which together could be worth around 20 billion pounds to our economy every year. the g7 agrees to step up efforts on the japan deal anaccelerate all work on the eu

u.s. trade deal. in has been 700 days since we launched and every day the deal is costing the global economy 630 million pounds. the agreement talks about finalizing the outline of an agreement ride ended this year. mr. speaker, we want all countries to grow, including the forest. not just for our benefit but because we all benefit in global growth. we should never forget what has been called. we agreed the importance of setting ambitious goals at the yuan in september that can eradicate extreme poverty in our world by 2030. we also reaffirmed our previous commitments on a and britain keeping promises to the forest in the world and i encourage directly others to do the same. turning to green growth, there were important agreements about the global deal we hope to reach in paris at the end of the year. it is ambitious to keep the goal of limiting growth and limiting

global warming to two degrees within reach. with real transparency and accountability so countries have to follow through on commitments and even long-term goals at the upper end of the ipc seat recommendations. businesses have the confidence to invest in technology. we also reaffirmed our strong commitment to globalize the climate forecast that will be essential to developing nations and make sure they sign up to an agreement. mr. speaker, there is a new element of fighting corruption. we met just after the fifa scandal but corruption is not just wrecking an institution, it is also sitting at the heart of so many problems we face around the world today. 10% could benefit the global economy by 380 billion dollars every year. corruption does not just that our prosperity but undermines our security, too. at the summit, i was determined

we should do more to confront this issue. their criminal investigators to enforce it and there are 28 country a programs that include anticorruption measures but we need the full support. with progress in germany, we've reaffirmed our commitment to the issues around transparency. we will work with the oecd and the g 20 to finalize an international plan to stop companies from artificially shifting the profits across borders to avoid taxes and they will ensure the implementation. over 90 countries have agreed to share tax information by the end of 2018 and they urged others to follow suit so more people pay the tax that is due. britain has become the first major country in the world to establish a public center registry or who really owns companies and there are other countries that have to follow of their own action plans.

a key step in countering money laundering and corruption. we also agree leaders we get special focus to the u.n. with an anticorruption summit in london next year. mr. speaker, turning to national security, there are a number of issues beginning with iraq syria, and isil. we are helping to train iraqi security forces so they can defeat isil on the ground. at the summit, i announced we will deploy an additional 125 military personnel to expand the training effort right across iraq. second, i reiterated our support for stability government that brings the country together and the -- and negates the common enemy. mr. speaker, that means defeating the poisonous ideology and extremism of abroad. mr. speaker, in syria, there is

no recruiting sergeant for isil. the g7 call for genuine political transition as the only way to bring peace and defeat terrorism in syria. in libya, there is a danger of isil terrorist in avoiding -- having any space to pot tax against european countries while european gangs are making libya the new gateway to europe for people smuggling. we agreed to give our full backing to put in place and national unity government in libya and we also agreed to a conference of approach going after the gangs that are trafficking people, stabilizing the country's from which the people are coming, and playing our full part in the humanitarian rescue issue. britain is playing its part involved the things with patriots picking up another 2500 people at the weekend. mr. speaker, we are also speaking -- picking up our efforts to support nigeria. i met the president during the summit and discussed with

president obama how we can best help nigeria to tackle corruption and win the fight against boko haram. the national security council leads this will be a specific priority and we are setting up across government unit designated on this task and we will be offering significant help including training the nigeria army to defeat boko haram. mr. speaker, turning to global health and playing our part in fighting disease over seas is not just a moral obligation that the single most effective way of preventing diseases affecting people in the u.k. following the ebola outbreak, it was right that the g7 devoted significant time to try and prevent a future global pandemic. at the summit, i announced the u.k. development fund focused on breakthrough medicines and we are also leading by example by promoting greater transparency and forming our own team of medics that can deploy rapidly to tackle infection outbreaks

anywhere in the world. finally, mr. speaker, there is the second year running that we met at the g7 rather than the g-8. the summed up the choice facing president putin. he can continue to wreck his countries economy and continued their isolation or he can recognize that russia's greatness does not depend on violating the territory and sovereignty of other countries. the g7 was clear about the position. diplomatic efforts will succeed in restoring u.k., t and integrity. existing sanctions must remain in place until they are fully implemented. we expect russia to stop separatist forces and use its influence to bring violence to and and. we were clear and i quote, stand ready to take further, restrictive measures in order to increase costs on russia should the actions required. that also means action from ukraine.

the president's government has the support needed to deliver the necessary political and economic reforms. the u.k. is helping to our governments fund and will continue to look at what more we can do, but we should never forget that they are victims and not the aggressors. our economy is growing and deficit falling and unemployment tumbling, people can see that britain is back. they're working for trade deals fighting corruption, and leading against -- and fighting isil and saving lives in the mediterranean, and we are standing firm against russia's actions in the ukraine on every front, we are playing a leading role and advancing prosperity around the world. in doing so, delivering both the economic security and the national security on which our future depends. >> i think the prime minister for his statement. i welcome the conclusions of this summit including the

reaffirmation of the g7 commitment. the commitment to finding -- fighting corruption and diseases. i particularly welcome the support for nigeria. mr. speaker, as he says, this is the second g-7 summit were russian has been excluded. it is right there should be consequences for what they are doing in the ukraine and russia should continue to be until president putin changes course. and sanctions against russia should remain until the agreements are fully implemented. these sanctions will expire at the end of july and he said they should be rolled over. he said in his statement that the g7 stands ready to take further restrictive measures. as for the sanctions will we be argument at the next counsel for them to be strengthened at the summit, the prime minister acknowledged that sanctions are also having an impact on those that are imposing them. it is right that the g7 leaders agreed more should be done to support those states who are being particularly affected.

can you tell the house what this could mean in practice? he referred in his statement to the fight against isil and we have seen the horrors of what they are doing in most soul and it is extremely worrying to see those advances, particularly in ramadi. a strong and united approach to tackling isil continues to be vital. we backed the uk's contributions toward that effort and welcomed the extra 125 military training being sent to iraq at the request of the iraqi prime minister. as he said in his statement, directly government must be supported in the efforts to push back by souls advance and restored stability and security across the country. -- pushback isil advance and restored stability and security across the country. a political settlement is vital. it is continuing to present iraqi government to do more to reach out to sunni tribes who are key to this.

the summit also reached important conclusions on the global economy and climate change. in discussion, can the prime minister confirm whether he sought specific assurances from president obama and that nhs would be protected? on climate change, can the prime minister clarify whether the g-7's commitment to a global will of greenhouse gas emissions reduction will be legally binding? mr. speaker, most of the press coverage around the g7 summit was not about the global economy, climate change or iso-. it was once again about rallying on europe. in this is primarily of the prime minister's own doing. on some days, he went to germany boasting that he would sack any minister he did not tell the line on the referendum. the loyal minister was

dispatched to the today program to drive home the prime ministers top line. later that very day, the prime minister summit and the retreat and the press that apparently misheard. there was a collective mishearing by the traveling press. [indiscernible] the prime minister graciously and kindly consented them, if you are not certain about something i said, then ask. how grateful i am for that new approach. [laughter] there are things you people are still uncertain about, so can i ask them -- what are his reform proposals and his mind, and can he say clearly now whether he is finished negotiating and he comes back arguing for a yes vote, will be sacked ministers who do not agree with him?

four does he agree with the mayor of london who says they can vote how they want? will the quiet man be here to stay or will he be allowed to turn up the volume? [laughter] yet again, another international summit vital to our national interests have ended in the usual way -- a prime minister fighting with his own party on europe. [applause] prime minister cameron: i enjoyed the last bit. back to the old punch. the premise that all this happened with journalists on the plane and not being able to hear, there were no journalists on the plane, so next time, you might want to get the details straight. anyway, let's go back to the beginning on russia. i am very grateful for her backing with the sanctions. the aim there will be a full

removal of the sanctions and more sanctions would be produced if russia took further aggressive actions. we hope that does not happen but russia needs to know that would be costs were that to happen. in terms of helping other states, i think we need to be cautious. the fact is, putting in place sanctions damages all european countries in different ways. britain itself vases damage from that. our argument should be not that we can't individually compensate individual states but that there are collective or individual interest, the rule-based system of our world continues to work and that russia does not violate that. i think we should look at that first. i thank her for her support of campaign against isil in iraq. she is absolutely right. this has been proven by the iraqi government and the problem in iraq and area are by inclusive government also can

represent all of their people. i am grateful for the extra 125 personal we have sent. she asked if iraq needs to do more to reach out to the sunni tribes and indeed, to train more of the security forces -- she is right on both of those. perhaps that needs to happen. on the issue -- the nhs is protected. there is no way that an agreement can lead to changes in our nhs. i will make this suggestion. instead of raising the threat that does not exist, it would be better the whole of the u.k. political system if they could come together and push the americans instead of trying to seek -- pushback americans to go further on putting more on the table to this trade deal so it really benefits people in britain. that is the argument we need to make. she asked the question about the climate change agreement. our views should be legally

binding and that is will we are pressing for. the language in the communique is progress and i think america is pitching in to these arguments but we would like them to go further. i think we dealt with all the european stuff. i make this point -- lift our eyes to the horizon and recognize -- she says it is back to the service of the 1990's. let me say something very different and this government compared to the governments of the 1990's, labor persuasion or conservative persuasion is that we have made a historic decision to let the people decide when it comes to europe. [applause] >> speaker i am pleased to hear from the prime minister. consider the humanitarian tragedy in the mediterranean where huge numbers of people are drowning trying to free conditions in their own countries. i agree with him that the

long-term solution is development aid in which the countries of they come. -- development aid in the countries of which they come. to get the administrative and technical support to the government and the failed state in libya which remains a lawless space through which huge numbers of people will continue to come unless and until some sort of stability is restored to the country. prime minister cameron: i absolutely will identify the core part of the problem and that is having government of national unity in libya because of the do offer technical assistance for the security, trading of libyans but until there is a government in place they don't really join up and make a comprehensive strategy. what we talked about in the g-7 was making sure foreign ministers and others were doing everything they can to support special representative lay on and his work to form the government.

once that is bent we can pour in assistance to help them deal with criminal gangs and secure the borders. >> may i begin by thanking the prime minister for his statement. there is much in the communique that can be commended. the first paragraph states, for example, we are committed to vice of freedom and democracy the rule of law and respect of human rights and fostering peace and security. and we, and these benches, would support human rights by protecting the human rights act in the weeks and months ahead. also in the communique, they are paragraphs on the global economy and on women's entrepreneurship to areas that are vital throughout the world. on specifics, on tax and corruption measures, i'm sure the prime minister would like to confirm that every cooperation is being given to swiss and you and legal authorities in relation to fifa on.the issue of trade, the communique welcomes progress of the atlantic trade but the prime

minister will also be aware of concerns about the potential impact on public service provisions as such as the national health service. what safeguards to the prime minister highlight as u.k. government requires -- requirements to protect the nhs. we have heard that there is no reason for concern. i think a good prospect should be included in any fifa deal. why did you not secure that on the face of the treaty? on foreign policy, i agree with the g-7 conclusions and relations to territorial integrity in the ukraine and the need to maintain sanctions against the russian state however, i would wish to warn of the risks of the situation in eastern ukraine the coming of frozen conflict. anybody who has witnessed what has happened in eastern europe since the fall of the iron curtain would be aware of what

has happened. while the immediacy of the situation needs action, there also needs to be a medium and long-term perspective for that normalization. may i welcome the provisions regarding maritime border and maritime security. this is relevant in the pacific and also relevant in our northern european neighborhood. can i encourage the u.k. government to actually take this seriously for a change? it was not mentioned in the last strategic defense and hopefully it will be included in the forthcoming. of course, the u.k. has not a single maritime patrol. finally, may i welcome migration and refugees in g-7 conclusions. i asked the prime minister about this last week. had he had any time to reflect on the appalling u.k. record and

giving refuge to those claimed the war in syria and elsewhere? does he now not agreed that he should be working with its international colleagues within the european union for us all to take a fair share of those required in refuge? prime minister cameron: thank you for your response and i take all of your points in turn. all maritime security and he is right to raise the issue that the arctic should be kept and looked at. i will make sure that happens. i don't agree with our record on refugees. i think we have an excellent record. by the second largest bilateral donor to make sure those people fleeing conflict in syria and iraq are properly looked after and we do have a program for settling particularly vulnerable families. tens of millions of people with the resettlement program is wrong. the answer has got to be stabilization in those countries . i think he is right about frozen

conflicts. one of the reasons we should take the problems of russian aggression in the ukraine so seriously is to be clear we are not going to tolerate the situations that happened in georgia and elsewhere. i think it is important we make such a stand -- strong stand over sanctions rather than what happened with georgia when they moved on. again, as i said today i think there is a real wasted opportunity in raising these force fears about potential privatization of the nhs. in the english nhs, it is the commissioners of services will make decisions. and they invest over and over again in and out the not -- and a national health service. for instance, the scottish

suffers from massive terrorists and wants to be able to sell into the u.s. he should spend his time looking after those businesses and those jobs and finding all of them. on the issue of tax evasion and avoidance and collaborating with the fifa investigation, i am sure we could get that reassurance but i will check carefully. finally, i believe in human rights and i think the best way to safeguard human rights is to have a british bill of rights. why not have these decisions made in british laws? >> mr. john? mr. john: in discussions about isil and russia, the annexation of crimea, [indiscernible] at the height of the arab spring has good time not now

come that the greater investment is the sco in order to ensure and help navigate increasingly uncertain world's? prime minister chemical i can reassure that they are hiring more russian speakers, that i would say the advice i get from our expert ambassador in russia from tim barrow is very, very high standard and his team works extremely hard and i want to take this opportunity to thank them publicly. >> will the prime minister except that if we stop training our forces in kenya and plan to do the same in canada, and therefore take a training holiday, we seriously undermine our own force and undermine our credibility. prime minister cameron: i think she makes an important point. armed forces benefit hugely from training in different countries and training in different conditions. training in kenya and training in canada is going to continue.

>> thank you, mr. speaker. one thing is for certain on the climate change argument, we don't want to salvage anything that damages are economy detrimentally. can he assured me he will not sign anything that does that? prime minister cameron: look, the argue i would make to skeptics about this issue is that britain has already taken some very significant steps to improve renewable energy, to improve the situation with regards to carbon emission, transport and housing and elsewhere. but also that other countries sign up to those things. that's why the discussions at the g-7 where you can see now countries that previously had been at the back of the queue countries like china, and america, are not coming forward with lands to make sure they put in place changes.

even if you are a skeptic, it is the time to get enthusiastic about the deal. >> [indiscernible] tax dodging by major companies which robs developing countries of major tax revenue -- two years of long, companies are still snapping their noses at governments on the issue of tax. when do we expect to see tangible results and the promises made at the taste -- at the g7 summits? hi mr. cameron: i would be a bit more positive in that i think two things have happened -- one is that countries have signed up to the automatic exchange of tax information which is vital. the culture and business is actually changing. business is -- businesses now know that all the discussions of the tax bill will not send up to public scrutiny. you see company after company

now, we have seen it recently with some in the world of hot drinks recognizing that they need actually to engage in this debate and stopping taxes in the country where they make their money. >> can i commend the prime minister on the announcement that there is a commitment to mobilizing climate for developing nations? this is hugely significant. kenny update the house when he expresses some of that mobilization to come forward? par mr. cameron: i think my friend is right. if we look at the components of a deal, you clearly need europe to come forward which we have done. you need america and china, that they countries, to be engage in the debate and making offers on carbon emissions but to me, one of the things that will bring it together is to make sure the advanced world is spinning forward climate finance funds so we can reassure countries and others that they will be assistance to them as they mitigate against climate change

and make the changes in their own economies as necessary. bridget has put a lot of money on the table. we need others to do the same and i think we will make progress in the coming months. >> this is the contribution of the scottish nationalist party. prime minister renzi told the summit that 100,000 people -- one month after 750 have died. i agree with the prime minister. this is a frustrating process. the cartoon process does not seem to be working and they are not doing their job. do we need another mechanism to try deal with this problem? prime minister cameron: first thank you for your question. i think the question is that we need to have a partner with whom we can work because frankly, until there is a libyan government and until there is a bill of -- ability to turn people back as they get into

boats, all the other steps we take of picking people up and the rest of it, they will not add up to a policy that will reduce this migration flow. i think we have to recognize that the one place this has worked in the past, the spanish efforts to stop people from going to the canary islands was where they were able to work with governments invest in governments, invest in security and that is the model we need to follow. >> you have spoken about the conversations you are having around stopping artificially shifting abroad -- this is something that made the british people very angry. can you give us more detail on those discussions? prime minister cameron: there are really two things we are going. -- doing. one is to work nationally and they have been meeting this work for profit shifting which is trying to stop businesses from shifting profits artificially around the world and the countries that have signed up to automatic tax evasion will have

worked. we have not waited for that because the chance to introduce but was called the diverted profits tax. we see a company that is making money in the u.k. but not paying taxes in the u.k., we can present it with the tax bill. we are doing this action for not waiting for domestically. i think this is changing the culture of the company's concern. >> i welcome the prime investors conversations with the commitment to tackle a boko haram in nigeria. he also mentioned the discussion about tackling corruption which is obviously a serious issue. can you give us more details on the discussion of that action question mark prime minister cameron: first but, i hope the lady would agree with me that the president's election is actually a very important moment for nigeria because he won this election even though he was facing some pretty overwhelming odds in terms of what his

opposing candidates party and what they were doing. and the president has a track record of fighting corruption and put it at the top of his agenda and his speech at inauguration was a model of doing that. what he needs to do is sort that corruption in the army and in the oil department and industry. what britain is trying to say is that we are there as your partner and want to help you. the more that we can do doubt to clean up this corruption, the vector they can be in nigeria and frankly, throughout the region. >> can i commend the prime minister on his statement on isil. it is a national security threat . president obama spoke about in developing plan for iso--- for iso-and trying to cope -- for isisll and trying to cope and they are talking about assume the national guard and the kurds are struggling to cope with -- struggling to cope.

can he discussed the plan for redoubling the efforts in iraq and syria on iso-question mark -- on isil? par mr. cameron: in my view, the violence is the greatest that we face on the national security front and it is a threat very directly affecting us here and frankly, it it is worrying how many people from britain had want to fight for isil. we got to cope with this. in terms of the points he makes he is right. we need to invest in iraqi government and its capacity to bring the country together by being a government for all sunni and kurd and having security forces that represent all the sunni, shearing -- sunni, and kurds. while helping to train forces as well. as members of the last parliament will know and the par mr. can testify, i am not

adverse to running exchanges on statements very fully because i think that is what democratic scrutiny with wires. there are heavily prescribed opposition debate today and there is a premium. mr. stephen? >> the g-7 leaders make reference to the people in the bay of bengal. this is a humanitarian crisis and rising public concern in this country about it. this he agree with me that it is time for the you went secretary general to take personal charge of dealing with this crisis? prime minister cameron: i think he is right to raise this. again, we need to trace it back in the country from which the problem is coming and we need major action by the burmese government. >> mr. speaker, i welcome the consideration being placed on tackling pandemics. can we have more details on how the u.k. research and development fund will help

prevent pandemics and prevent infection of people here in the united nation? david cameron -- prime minister cameron: when pandemic strikes we need faster action which is why we need a team to get out there and measure the situation which is what britain is ready to do. the second thing is to put money into medicine development and vaccines so we have better ways of coping with these things when they happen. >> what assurance can the prime minister give in the g7 discussions that any trade deal will be based on genuine and free trade and not on regular to standard life station in the interest of corporate interests? prime minister cameron: i suspect it will be a combination of both of those things. i don't think we should shy away

from that because opportunity for the two largest economies in the world, the eu and america and writing some of these rules together will actually make sure that we have a good and decent standard rather than the bottom. i think it is important that we should see that as an infant -- as an advantage. >> the g7 agrees that the situation in the eastern ukraine has gone from bad to worse. if so, why hasn't more been done so there can be increased sanctions against the russian federation rather than just the rolling over of existing sanctions? prime minister cameron: i think my older friend makes an important point. there has been a mixed picture since the agreements were signed. that overall i would say, has been some sign of lower-level of violence and aggression, so we should recognize that. i think the decision to roll

over the factions in june is right with a clear warning that if things were to get much worse . if there was to be part instance russians pushing for more territory, that getting to higher sanctions. >> mr. speaker, can i ask the prime minister about his speech on economic security -- what does he say for those who criticize the g7 that we have never actually learned the lessons of the well economic meltdown in 2008 and put together a policy or set of regulations and set of organizations that can prevent it happening again? prime minister cameron: what i would say to the older gentleman is that actually, the g 20 has been, in many ways, the key organizing body for driving, for instance, changes on rolls -- bank regulation, capital requirements and also reform of global institutions. i think that helps because

banking problems and meltdowns can happen in developing countries as well as advanced countries. the strength of the g7 is that we discussed economics and trade issues but we do have a very like-minded conversation about the big security challenges like iso--- like isil and russia. >> thank you, sir. the hard work of the british people, including my constituents combined with our long-term economic plan, have ensured our economy in the u.k. is growing but external economic risks remain. can prime minister in large on what discussions he has on those and how to my to get them -- and how to mitigate them question mark prime minister cameron: i think there are potential of risk, including the chinese economy. that was obviously discussed. in the margins of the g7, there are a number of discussions around the table about the

threat to the stability of the euro zone of the very unstable situation in greece and that is of interest to all the members of the g7. we are approaching some pretty crucial days were agreements need to be reached in order to maintain the stability of a bunch of economies that are very big trading partners for britain. >> with further deployment of the u.k. and u.s. troops in iraq , what measures as he put in place to guard against mission creek question mark prime minister cameron: how we one of the most important things is to discuss and debate what we are doing. what would i -- what i would say about the latest deployment is that it is in response to request from the iraqi government. these individuals are mostly involved in training the iraqi troops on how to counter iud threats will save lives and i think it is an approach for britain to take. in terms of what we are doing broadly, we are the second largest contributor in terms of

airstrikes over iraq and that has been essential in shaking the amount of territory that i sil controls and make each of the kurds have been able to maintain the situation in the kurdish regional authority. clear statement from the dispatch. it is helping legitimate government recognized by the u.n. to do the work and this is vital. >> when he was prime minister and i'm not sure it's in the british national interests.