at this point, i am still about commenting on you do know, however, that there are u.s. military forces that are on the ground in iraq that are part of the forces that are dedicated to carrying out raids, collecting intelligence, and where possible, getting access to high-value targets. but i just am have the information for you about that. any information that does come will be distributed by the department. >> was the president surprised by hillary clinton's upset? >> i have not talked to him about the results of yesterday's election, but i think many people have expressed surprise that the outcome of the election

was different than what was predicted by the pre-election polls. there has been a lot of analysis devoted to figuring out why the polls were wrong. i think what is more important is for us to acknowledge that there is a spirited debate on the democratic side. i think we saw two candidates on the democratic side yesterday that have a demonstrated ability to energize and inspire passionate democratic voters and when you talk about a state that sometimes is a swing state, that's an important characteristic to have in your candidate. >> i wanted to follow-up on a .uestion last week the senate today finally passed

the bill to set up teams for the transition. do you have any update if there ?as a decision on that x absent any legislation, this administration is committed to making sure that president obama's successor has the full inperation of his staff ensuring a smooth transition. we talked before about how president george w. bush directed senior members to ensure that proper planning was in place to allow president transition to office as soon as possible. that of course is the responsibility of the incumbent president. in the case of president bush, it demonstrated a commitment to the smooth and effective operation of the government, even when it means cooperating

with someone who is in a different political party. president obama certainly hopes and expects to be succeeded by democrat, but either way, the incoming president can surely count upon the full cooperation of this administration in ensuring that the next administration can get off to a running start. itself, i don't have an answer for you in terms of whether or not we believe it is necessary, but at this point i do not anticipate that the president would veto the bill. i inc. he would sign it. -- i think he would sign it. on isil and chemical weapons, if they are getting close to developing more dangerous nerve gases -- >> at this point there has been

some evidence in some discussion and even some reports about potential use chemical weapons by isis. we are reviewing those reports and obviously the use of chemical weapons by anybody is an atrocity, and one that the international community will not stand for. however, if those reports are correct, it would not be an outlier in terms of the tactics that we know isil uses. we know isil is an extremist organization that seeks to achieve their aims by .errorizing its people so their use of chemical weapons , if true, would be consistent with those kinds of tactics. it's certainly something the united states and international partners take quite seriously. i think i would leave it there. >> what can the u.s. do to prevent the development of these weapons?

the russians with -- ityears ago, one thing was important not just because it took one dangerous weapon out ad the arsenal of the ass regime, that was important would attackegime innocent people. it made it less likely and basically this point impossible that the chemical weapons that that stockpile could fall into the hands of isil. it was another key benefit of theirccess in destroying chemical weapons stockpile. that certainly is one thing that we have done. we undertakenrts to limit that kind of

proliferation and we are mindful of how important that is when it comes to the kind of chaos we are seeing in iraq and syria. , does it lookiran like the white house will -- what are the kinds of things that would be an appropriate response? >> we are aware of reports about additional missile launches today in iran. we are going to take a close look in those launches in the same way we're continuing to look at the lodge is carried out by iran earlier this week. unfortunately, i ran's insistence on developing a ballistic missile program out of widely recognized international standards is a long-standing concern to the international community. is in fact for the reasons the united states led the way to

develop, negotiate, and implement successfully a diplomatic agreement to prevent iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. we know that iran is working aggressively to try to enhance their ballistic missile capability, and preventing them ize iseing able to nuclear eye obviously important to our national security in the united states and to our allies and partners in the region. we are pleased we have been able to successfully implement a diplomatic agreement to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon but we will continue to redouble our efforts with our allies and partners in the region to try to limit iran's ability as they continue to develop their missile program outside of international conventions. do there is more that we can

to enforce sanctions that are in place. there are also a set of restrictions about what kind of equipment and materials can be there iso iran, and more that we can do to work with our partners to interdict those kinds of shipments that may include those problems -- those products. pursued then we international agreement to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon. as we learn more information about what you have done, we will determine and hope it was on. the other thing i will point out iran is inknow that a season of carrying out a number of military activities, so it certainly would not be a surprise if there are additional lodgings over the next several days that are similar to the launches that we have seen already a couple of times this week.

>> in michigan, senator sanders came through with a surprise win. is the obama administration at a step with a large chunk of the democratic race and is it a sign that the white house should delay of push and congress for approval? >> i think we have knowledge that there are a lot of democrats. reflexive -- it makes the politics of this particular issue complicated, but it does not in any way undermine the case we make about how agreements like the transpacific partnership that environment,to the to labor rights and to human rights, those kinds of agreement are good for the u.s. economy. the reason they are a net

positive for the u.s. economy is that it begins to level the playing real and gives american workers and american businesses more of an opportunity to compete on a level playing field and the president is confident that when american businesses and american workers are given a fair playing field, that americans are going to win more often than not. concern,this legitimate, that is articulated by many leaders in the democratic party about the impact that the broader globalization are having on middle-class families and middle-class workers across the country. those concerns are entirely legitimate. there are certain sectors of our economy and even certain communities that have been more negatively of acted i the forces of globalization. , anduestion president as he asked himself as the leader of the country, what can we do about it?

as the leader of the united states have a responsibility to look out for the economy and for every community in the country. so what do we do about those forces of globalization? we have not heard opponents articulate a legitimate or realistic strategy for doing so. the president, on the other hand, has laid out a very clear strategy for making sure the united states does more to engage with those countries, including some countries in southeast asia that have some of the most dynamic economies in the world. and by leveling the playing field, we can make sure that u.s. citizens are not at a disadvantage when they are with those businesses in southeast asia. the other thing we are doing is also making sure that those , that we can do taxes thathe 18,000 are currently imposed on goods that are stamped made in the usa , and that by cutting those

ites, we can actually make easier for u.s. businesses to do business overseas. that will only expand economic growth and job creation right here in the united states. the other thing we know from economist is that jobs that are directly connected to international trade on average pay more than jobs that are not. so if we are looking to create good jobs in the united states including good paying jobs, and we need to look for ways to open up more markets to u.s. business services. all of that is a good income and that is the strategy that the president has for confronting this significant challenge. i recognize that this is not going to immediately overcome the decades of democratic party orthodoxy, when it comes to opposing trade, but for people who are willing to consider the specific trade agreement on the

whyts, there is no mystery the president and at least some democrats in congress are supportive of it and we will continue to make that case across the country. >> back in january -- there do not seem to have in any changes are strides made. is there any more information or leads and are they cooperating at all? >> the white house issued a statement on paper earlier today marking the anniversary of mr. andnson's disappearance noting our continued efforts to determine his whereabouts. as part of securing the release of a handful of americans that we know were unjustly detained in iran, we secured a commitment cooperateranians to with the united states in our

efforts to determine his whereabouts. is reason their cooperation important is the last time mr. levinson was seen, he was in iran. we have some pointed questions about what they may know about his current whereabouts. i don't have a lot of information to share about those discussions. i continued that those discussions are ongoing and i can take you that we take quite the u.s. government's responsibility to try to find mr. levinson, but we also are iran'so take seriously commitment, and hold them to that commitment, to work with us to determine his whereabouts. >> following up on a discussion we had yesterday, the attorney general is keeping her name out of the running to be the supreme court justice nominee. that whoever he

nominates will have to essentially get kicked around by the republicans for a couple of months? to theink the reference cumbersome nature of the nomination process is the fact that ms. lynch has quite an important job already, and to put her through that nomination process would prevent her from doing the important work that she is currently test with at the department of justice. that is the circumstance that we are seeking to avoid, and a certain sense that she is seeking to avoid, and that is why she has made clear that she did not want to be considered. more generally, though, i think this is something we discussed yesterday, if we see a leading republican in the united states senate that indicates that republicans would treat the .resident's nominee as a pinata he offers up this rather colorful description despite the fact that he does not know who

the president's nominee is. think it's a clear indication that republicans have no intention of being fair to the president's nominee, and i don't think that fits with anybody's description of what the sentence constitutional responsibility is. cornynnote that senator used similarly colorful language back in 2006 when talking about the senate's treatment of president bush's nominee's to the court. let me just quote once again from senator cornyn who said the current regime treats supreme court nominees more like a knot is than human beings -- more than human beings. that is something none of us should be willing to tolerate, senator cornyn continues. let me just point out, he was actually referring to a nominee from president bush, justice alito, who received courtesy visits from democratic leaders on capitol hill.

he received a timely hearing. he got an up or down vote in the u.s. senate, and he was confirmed to the supreme court. if senator cornyn believes that judge alito was unfairly , what heike a pinata is vowing to do to president obama's as yet unnamed nominee is far, far worse, and that's why we make a strong case that what republicans are proposing to do, and had been doing in this process thus far is an unprecedented and unwarranted escalation of partisan politics when it comes to the one branch of government that is supposed to be insulated from it, and that is supreme. obviously we've got have acans who will difficult time trying to defend both the way that handled this thus far, and i think they will have a tough time defending

following through on their threats to treat the president's pinata.as a is the state of the presidential race, how is that playing into your argument? are you suggesting the republicans may have a better chance trying their luck as opposed to waiting down the road? >> i do think republicans are in a bit of a curious position. presidentbecause obama has had an opportunity over the course of his twoidency to nominate individuals to phils bring in court vacancies. both of those individuals have received bipartisan support. that wasld note bipartisan support they received even though democrats had a

healthy majority in the u.s. senate. so even though he was not necessarily were hard to take someone who has the kind of credentials and temperament and judgment that would earn bipartisan support, the president felt that was an important part of the job description. that's what is required by the constitution and that's what the president did. with senate republicans now, they are in the position of they are going to oppose president obama's nominee, no matter who it is summer regardless who he chooses, because they are going to let the next president decide. the reason this is a curious position is each of those members of the senate did not run for five-year terms. they ran for six your terms. they have a responsibility in the final year in office. the president did not run for a three-year term in 2012. he was elected to a four-year term and he is fulfilling his constitutional duty as described in the constitution that the president is given, which is

that the president, the constitution says that the president shall appoint a nominee to fill a vacancy in the supreme court. that's what the president is going to do, and the senate has a responsibility to give that person timely consideration in the context of a hearing and a yes or no vote. >> does the white house regard robert levinson as a hostage? >> mark, right now the white house does not know the whereabouts of mr. levinson. the last time we knew of his whereabouts was nine years ago today, and he was in iran. that is why we have compelled the iranians in the context of the agreement that was reached earlier this year to work with us to determine exactly where mr. levinson is. >> the fbi issued a statement roberteferring to levinson as the longest held american hostage ever.

of policy with the white house? the fbie not seen statement. i can to you what the white house view of this is. it is simply that we would like to know mr. levinson's whereabouts. we are legitimately concerned about his well-being, based on the fact that we don't know his are working and we with the iranians who have agreed to provide us information about his location, and we are working with them to try and determine exactly where he is. on the supreme court nomination, has the president started meeting with prospective nominees? >> i will not be in a position, i do not anticipate being in a position to confirm any individual meetings our conversations that the president has. isontend that the process ongoing. the president does continue to meet with members of his team to discuss this issue and to discuss this important decision,

but i don't have any updates for you in terms of whether or not he has talked to any potential nominees. anticipate any significant supreme court news from the white house today. i don't have any guidance for tomorrow. >> i saw reports that the president had endorsed and illinois state legislative race this week. last week he endorsed to senate primaries. you said the president wants to give democratic voters at chance to weigh in on the presidential race. what is the difference? >> each of them is a little bit different. it's sort of relevant to the question you asked about the ohio senate race. one of the reasons the president weighed in on the illinois statehouse race is the incumbent democrat was somebody who had not demonstrated commitment to pursuing common sense gun safety

legislation. the president made a promise earlier this year that he would name would not be associated with that she would not order advocate for the election of democrat who don't support commonsense gun safety legislation. this is an example of the president following through --ry eye will knowledge this i will acknowledge this on the front end, we will not ballotize every single across the country but obviously the president's home state of illinois of place he knows well, and he knows the individuals well. the president felt like it was important for him to weigh in on. congressman murphy and governor strickland, the president is

interested in doing as much as he can to support democrats in their effort to retake the majority of the united states senate and he certainly has put alongside who he believes are the strongest candidates in those two key states. [indiscernible] >> i have not ruled out the presidential race and the president has not either at this point, however we do not plan to. of eachthe dynamics race are different and some of it also has to do with the president's view that particularly at the presidential the democratic candidates are likely to benefit from having a longer than expected campaign. that certainly was true when he ran in 2008. we were remarking earlier today that after the outcome in

michigan, many people are observing once again that the democratic contest is likely to last a little longer than most people expected. people were saying the same thing eight years ago today. we are about a week out of the texas and ohio contest in 2008. of course secretary clinton won in ohio and she narrowly won the primary in texas. they have a rather peculiar system in texas are choosing their delegates. there had been some thinking that if then senator obama had won one of those two states that he might be able to steal the nomination, but because senator , andon emerged a torres there are many people who worried about the impact this would have on democrats prospects in the general election. as you heard me observer on a number of occasions, both democratic candidates, theicularly eventually

democratic nominee benefited significantly from that longer than expected campaign. it gave the party the opportunity to build a campaign apparatus in states where democrats did not previously have an aggressive general election effort. indiana is probably the best example. indianabarack obama won in 2008 and that was placed the democrats had not even competed in quite time. concerned thate the presidential election, at least the democratic contest in 2016, looks like it's going to last longer than was anticipated , that is not necessarily bad news. >> one more topic, congress is in the final stages of passing the opioid crisis. has policyouse related to asking for additional funding. is the white house repair to

sign the bill in its current form? >> my understanding is this is still beingat is negotiated up on capitol hill. at this point, our view is that we welcome recognition on the part of both democrats and republicans that opioid abuse is a significant problem in too many communities across the country. the problem with the bill is that it does not include nearly enough resources to begin to address that problem. what would like to see the congress do is more than just pay lip service to the problem and actually put forth some specific ideas with funding to address it. out about at laid billion dollars in resources that he believes could be used to effectively combat this scourge in communities large and small all across the country. and congress should consider legislation that includes the

necessary resources, rather than just passing a bill that observes there is a problem. [indiscernible] look at, we will take a the bill as it works its way through the legislative process, but our view is that congress should actually pass legislation that has the necessary resources to begin to confront this issue. if they are wondering about what sort of good ideas are out there in terms of programs that we wouldunding, include them in our budget and i suppose if the republicans had not cancel the budget hearings before the president even released his budget, we would have had more of an opportunity to talk about those ideas. >> back to the trade issue in the michigan vote, the whole idea about leveling the playing field, one of the arguments bernie sanders makes is that there cannot be fair trade when

earned $.56ietnam an hour minimum wage versus what americans may, which is much more. to that specific point, how do you get a level playing field in a trade deal when those workers make $.56 an hour versus -- how do yours get a level playing field with that paradigm? level thees not playing field at all is doing nothing and complaining about it. that will not have any impact on policy in vietnam. what will have an impact on policy in vietnam is telling the vietnamese government that if they want to have more access to the u.s. market, which we know they would like, they need to do something about labor standards in their country. and if you don't, you will have access to our markets. and we will go back to them and say you need to start observing

legitimate environmental standards you need to start protecting human rights in your country. and if you don't, you will have access to u.s. markets. wages are not anywhere comparable to what an american worker makes. that kind of disparity, which is pretty striking -- you can't have what you say, as a level playing field. sec. earnest: my report -- my r etort to that, what are they doing? there is nothing laid out by the anti-tpp forces to counter the forces of globalization and stand up for middle-class workers. we have laid out a clear strategy. we're going to impose enforceable standards on vietnam. if they want access to this country, they have to put in place higher standards for labor rights, environmental rights and human rights. the other thing they have to do iftreat u.s. goods fairly

they want to do business in their country. that is significant because vietnam has a rapidly growing middle class. we are seeing significant economic growth in vietnam. that is a tremendous opportunity for u.s. businesses to invest in vietnam in a way that will yield economic growth, jumped ration, growth,er wages -- job and higher wages. forave a coherent strategy countering the forces of globalization, increasing wages, expanding economic opportunity, and creating jobs in the u.s. that is what we should do. just that i disagree with the argument made by the other side. there is no cover proposal. there is no argument by the other side. we all share concerns about the impact of globalization. there are communities in this

country that are hurting as a result. the question is whether or not that is occurring, but what are we going to do about it? president obama has laid out a clear strategy how to tackle the challenge. forn the official statement tomorrow, what is the criteria that gets to that level -- this will be the 12th? do comments about-- trudeaume minister anti-trump comments have anything to do with the white house visit? sec. earnest: no, this was planned some time ago. he is the closest economic partner of our country and he does it work critical to the u.s. national security. the u.s. has a strong interest

in cultivating strong ties with the nation of canada, the people of canada, and the new prime minister of canada. we are looking forward to his visit tomorrow. >> there hasn't been a visit for 20 years until now. the timing just seems perhaps political. sec. earnest: the timing is that it coincides with the election of a new printer in canada. i think that is straightforward. -- a new prime minister in canada. we will have more information on the guest list tomorrow. april? >> two subjects. [indiscernible] how does the auto bailout --dustry factor into yourearnest: all of news organizations have hundreds

of people on the payroll doing postelection analysis. it seems like pretty good work if you can get it. maybe something i will, but not today. the president made a strong case about the positive impact that his policies have on the auto industry in michigan. vergendustry was on the of collapsing. positions difficult that this incident made early on in his presidency, we have seen the auto industry, roaring back. that is thanks primarily to the grit and determination of american workers. but it wouldn't have been possible without the policy decisions that this president made and this administration implemented. i don't know what impact it had on the primary. it had a impact in the general

election of 2012. you have a stark contrast between president obama's record of trying to support the american auto industry and a republican candidate who famously wrote an op-ed suggesting we should just let detroit go bankrupt. when faced with that stark choice, even the republican nominees did not make it competitive. that is the latest available evidence that we have in terms of referendum on that policy decision. we will have to see how things shake out in 2016. i would not be surprised if we are faced with a general election choice between a mechanic candidate - a democratic candidate that believes strongly in the value of having invested in american manufacturing and a republican recognizewho doesn't why that should be a priority. >> looking at those in michigan that are impacted by the auto

,ndustry sec. earnest: there is no denying the progress michigan has made in digging out of the hole created by the great recession. in many ways, the state of michigan was hurt as badly as any other state. but because of how closely tied their broader economy is to the -- you can look at the news reports of the time, the american auto industry -- weeks or even days from totally collapsing. that did not just affect the big 3 u.s. automakers, it would have an effect up and down their supply chain. one million jobs potentially at stake here. that is why the president believed that action was

required to support that industry and make the recovery that we see today possible. the reason that the michigan economy is doing well now is that we do see the american auto industry is performing at unseen levels. their profits are higher, they are making more cars and selling more cars than ever before. that is a good thing for the michigan economy and happens to be a darn good thing for the u.s. economy too. nominee, supreme court could you talk about these letters to the white house from women'stions, the black roundtable gave a list of names and other organizations. can you talk about the process once you get the names, how you compare them to the list that you already have, or continue to get new names -- can you talk about the process?

the process of filling a vacancy in the supreme court is something that a lot of people are interestedin. that is understandable when you consider the broad impact that the supreme court has in policymaking. we have seen that some of the policies this and ministration untiltized were at risk the supreme court made a final ruling. some of the affordable care act rulings would have significantly changed our ability to implement that law out of the supreme court ruled in a different way. the stakes are high. obviously there are a lot of organizations here in d.c. that are trying to influence policy and have ideas who should serve on the supreme court. what you've seen in the administration is something we do on a range of issues, which is to engage with people outside

of this building to have a conversation about their views. that is part of the reason that the president has consulted with some new members of the u.s. senate. there are democrats and republicans across washington and the country that have been consulted by the white house on this specific decision the president has to make. all about is fed into the process that is being run by senior members of the president's team to present him with the information he needs to make a decision. this kind of consultation and outreach is part of what we do every day of the white house. >> you are saying they have some influence over the process, or is that too strong? sec. earnest: there has been a concerted effort on the part of white house officials to reach out beyond the white house to

consult with interested parties on this decision. we have easily take that feedback seriously. we welcome the kind of input that we have received out of the many conversations that have occurred of the spark. >> do you take seriously the feedback from the black women's roundtable, and the naacp and other groups that say loretto lynch should be your nominate? -- your nominatee? sec. earnest: absolutely. mrs. lynch as indicated she does not want to be selected for the appointment because she has a lot of work at the department of justice. serving as the nominee of the supreme court would interfere with her ability to get all that done. she indicated she does not wish to be considered, so we have greater that request. can you talk about the arrest

of kyle andrew at the white house, suspected of shooting on not the whether or white house was a target, and a mes,festo with pastor's na members of the senate, and israeli officials he was targeting. what can you tell us about that? sec. earnest: i don't have much update on the case. the secret service put out a statement yesterday, or earlier today, detailing exactly what happened. byividual was apprehended the u.s. secret service personnel after he threw some material over the south fence. once he was detained and questioned, they read his information and learned he was wanted in connection with an attempted murder in idaho. obviously serious charges.

i will i will defer to local officials in idaho for their ongoing investigation. given where this individual was detained, the secret service has questions for him as well. i don't have an update in terms of their investigation. >> is there any concern that local officials on a database right after they had surveillance video showing the shooting of a pastor, that he was able to board a plane in boise and get to washington dc? farther -- are there discussions between the white house and th faa about that? sec. earnest: i think that is more a narrative local law-enforcement. >> on another matter, the vice president yesterday condemned the palestinian leaders for not coming out aggressively and a strongly, saying that the terrorist attacks in tel aviv was something that shouldn't have happened.

he was meeting with mahmoud abbas today. the reports of this particular incident were just emerging prior to my briefing yesterday. at that point, i heard strong condemnation, as we routinely do, in these terrorist incidents. at the time we were not aware that an american citizen was the victim of this crime. this kind of attack would be outrageous, even if it didn't involve an american. but clearly it does. that is why the thoughts and prayers of everybody here at the white house are with the family of the young man who was killed yesterday. the vice president spoke to this when he had an opportunity to do so in his public appearance prime minister netanyahu. it does seem hard to imagine that this issue would not come up when the president meets with

president abbas. >> the expectation that he will publicly condemn the attack? sec. earnest: our expectation would be that public officials, particularly those in a position of leadership, would condemn any act of terrorism. and would condemn any effort to carry out and the violence against innocent civilians. that is worthy of condemnation. notches on the part of the u.s. and israel. but by countries around the world, including the leader of the palestinian people. >> finally, following up on april's questions, further that loretto lynch has not wanted her name in the process, governor sandoval also announced that you are losing potentially good nominees to the supreme court before the process

even begins because of the contentious nature of this fight. sec. earnest: no, i am not worried about that at all. i would refer you to the public statements that have been made by each of those individuals. none of them have indicated they are concerned about the contentious nature of the hearing. they had their own individual reasons for choosing not to be a part of the process. i continue to be confident that the president will choose the very best person in america for this job. margaret? outreach from the u.s. to a army that that was killed-- sec. earnest: i don't know if there is any outreach, but we will keep you posted. pointmade the [indiscernible] are you speaking about the proof of like a video of him in orange jumpsuit? at the time, hillary clinton

says he was in southwest asia. are you differing from that? is there a change in view? sec. earnest: our view is that the last time we knew definitively where he was was in iran. that was nine years ago today, unfortunately there has been other evidence put forward that does not make it precisely clear where he is. that is what we are working with the iranians to determine, to find out exactly what his location is and his whereabouts. the iranians have committed to do that. we have held them to that commitment. >> it wasn't that the secretary of state was being intentionally--[indiscernible] sec. earnest: i'm explaining why we believe that iran has an ability to assist the u.s. in

determining his whereabouts. the last time that we knew definitively where he was, he was in iran. we believe that places upon the iranian government an obligation to work with us to try and find him. that is what we are seeking to do. the iranians have agreed to do that. we are holding them to that commitment. >> you said you have not seen the fbi statement-- that phrase was not in the state department, not in the white house statement. are you saying beyond the pr statement that the white house does not--[indiscernible] sec. earnest: i am saying it's conclusiveo reach a statement like that. we don't know where he is. that is why we are working so hard to determine his whereabouts.

iranians had made a commitment to help us determine his location. we are holding them to that. we continue to engage with conversations with them. obviously this is a difficult time for the levinsohn family. with them asare they go through what is an unthinkable situation. obviously that is a difficult thing for any family to go. they are concerned about their loved ones. it is why the u.s. is going to great lengths to determine the whereabouts of this americans and we can bring him home. >> it's been widely reported there is a difference and you between law enforcement and the white house. someone in the initiation -- in the administration asked you his status. do you dispute that?

sec. earnest:; i don't know the latest law-enforcement review. i would do for you to that. our policy from here is to hold the iranians accountable to determine his location. the reason we hold them accountable is that last time we knew definitively where he was, he was in iran. that places an obligation on the iranian government to assist us. fortunately they have committed to cooperate with us. we are going to, as i mentioned, spare no effort to try and secure his return. we don't know definitively where he is. that makes it hard to determine what his status is. we are concerned about his safety. we are quite interested in learning his whereabouts. obviously the levinsohn family has gone through a great deal of turmoil and pain. that is why we have placed such a priority on finding him and

bringing him home. cuba,ferent topic -- there was an op-ed in the communist party paper, cubans demanding and taking clear that they are not going to change their policies for the u.s., that president obama could do more. are you disappointed at this? no, i've not particularly concerned about it. we have a long agenda for the president's trip to cuba. not long agenda includes visiting with political opponents of the cuban government, and standing up for the universal human rights of the cuban people. that is our priority here. by more deeply engaging the cuban government, economy, and people, we can more effectively advance the interests of the

cuban people. that has benefits for the united states, as many would tell you, but this is an opportunity for us to use the moral influence of for greateradvocate freedoms for the cuban people. that is something that the u.s. does run the world. it makes sense we would do that in a country just 90 miles off the shore. kevin? >> back on attorney general lynch. would you agree it's possible the president informed her before she made a statement, that she was simply not going to be the nominee, allowing her the dignity of issuing a statement on her own? sec. earnest: i'm not aware of the president having done that. my understanding is that she contacted the white house to make clear that she has a lot of important work to do at the of justice. for that reason, asked not to be considered for an apartment to a new job.

>> i'm curious, because when they asked you want the very 19th about the same topic, you used solicitor general kagan of an example of someone that could certainly do the job, would not interfere with her ability to cope with the process, while still conducting the business of the people of the u.s. i'm curious what difference is here. sec. earnest: the scope of response abilities for the attorney general is much broader than of the scope for the solicitor general. >> he said -- you said is an example, when i asked you-- sec. earnest: it's a relative example. mrs. kagan is somebody that turned out to be an excellent supreme court justice. in that situation, we were able to design a solution that allowed ms. kagan's deputy to assume responsibility while she went through the process. when you consider the scope of responsibilities, especially

those being dealt with at the department of justice, fighting isil, there are a number of prosecutions, including the fee for prosecution ongoing -- fifa prosecution ongoing. to remove mrs. lyrnc from the equation would beh disruptive. that is why she made an affirmative request to the not be considered for the appointment to the spring court. the president granted that request. >> a follow-up on her comments about the ongoing investigation into the clinton e-mail scandal. she made a recent comment suggesting that under no circumstances did they -- there was no sort of back-and-forth. can you reiterate from the administration's perspective, has there been any conversations during this investigation? has there been in any updating by the doj? have you seen any sort of back-and-forth? sec. earnest: i have not been a part of any of those conversations. the attorney general that leads that the prevent says they did

not occur. i would not have any reason to disagree with her. she says the department of justice has not been communicating extensively with the white house about this. >> you have not had conversations with anyone? sec. earnest: of course no. sweep, ju a broad dges-- broad brush. what makes these people interesting possible nominees? sec. earnest: a couple of the names that you mentioned are individuals who were appointed by president obama to the federal bench. in most casses, these were peope that were confirmed bipartisan support of the u.s. senate to serve. i would be the first to acknowledge, as i have

previously, that an apartment to the spring court is a unique case. -- an appointment to the supreme court is a unique case. that is why we would defer to the process of interviewing wees, submitting them to tough questioning and shortening for this position. observation is that these are all individuals who have already served the country in the judicial branch with distinction. having that kind of background certainly does give us an indication that they could be good supreme court nominees. but at this point, i'm not in his vision different anyone is consideration by the white house. i don't want to lead you astray. certainly the free individuals that the are ones

president was proud to appoint. >> any conversations that you can't talk about, that we are not privy to, is there any possible way we can get more than "i can't confirm?" because the american people want to know where are we in this process? i'm glad mark asks about today. each day we are on pins and needles trying to figure out where we are in the process. sec. earnest: it's exciting, isn't it? >> but where are we in the process? [laughter] sec. earnest: unfortunately i don't have any information i can share. what i can tell you is that once the president has made the decision, i do think we will be able to provide a bit more insight into what went into his making of that decision. the things you have -- things he has been thinking about the past several weeks.

that is more easy to illustrate once the president has made a decision. we can certainly have a conversation about that. and i expect we will have more than one. the president has made some progress. >> i want to ask about trade. you laid out the administration policy in your argument. it seems that it is a pr , it seems like bernie sanders has one that argument pretty handily in michigan. does the white house need to do more, especially since the tpp has not been voted on and seems to be in limbo -- do you need more in this pr battle before it becomes a more contentious issue in the broader elections? sec. earnest: there is one aspect of your ornament i would quibble with -- your argument i would quibble with, which is that senator sanders was appealing to democratic voters

in a democratic primary that have a long known institutional reflexive negative reaction to discussions about expanding international trade. it is not surprising that senator sanders has adopted this rhetoric. successfully, to appeal to at least some of the voters in michigan. what i would point out is that we had an opportunity to test to this last summer. the president was working aggressively to build a bipartisan coalition in the u.s. congress in support of trade promotion authority. that would allow the president to complete the transpacific partnership negotiations. there is a lot of cry about how candidates on the campaign trail, even back in may and june, were getting a lot of it,ntion, they had opposed including secretary clinton. , continues toe

lead in the national polls. there was concern among some in washington this would be the final nail in the coffin as our efforts to secure trade promotion authority legislation. when in fact, we actually succeeded in building that bipartisan majority. there were twists and turns along the way. the death of that legislative effort was predicted more than once. we encountered a few snafus. we were able to overcome them. that is why i would encourage you to not be distracted by the debate on the campaign trail when it comes to evaluating the prospects for our trade legislation. i would also make the point that there have to make to congress now is much more powerful than the art meant we could make around trade promotion authority. at the time, trade promotion authority was asking essentially a bunch of republicans to give

the democratic president the authority to negotiate this agreement. now we are in a position where we actually have tangible benefits to present to individual members of congress and make a persuasive case to them about how the country and their constituents will benefit from the trade agreement. products inment how every single state of the taxesy will see the imposed on them by other countries cut as a result of this agreement. is a good thing for our economy, the companies in business of exporting those products overseas. that will expand economic growth in america, opportunity, create jobs in america, and even put upward pressure on wages, according to some studies. those are all good things. that is all part impartial to the president's strategy for

counteracting the forces of globalization that have had a negative impact on some communities. rather than just complain about it, rather than wring his hands about it, the leader of the free world has said this is a strategy we will implement to look out for middle-class families. that is a persuasive case we will take to the u.s. house and senate to get them to support this agreement. because we were able to reach trade promotion authority, a vote that required 60 votes in the u.s. senate, in order to ratify this, it only requires 50 votes in a u.s. senate. not only is our argument stronger, the herbal that we need -- the hurdle that we need to climb is a little lower. >> you mentioned in the democratic primary, but republicans are making a similar argument that these treaty deals have not been good. jobs.hey have not help

that seems to have some bipartisan support. sec. earnest: the freedom caucus , my friends that hang out on the coast promote trade authority legislation too. that did not prevent us from building the bipartisan majority needed to get trade promotion authority legislation. as i observed this time around, we have a stronger argument. and we have less of an obstacle to overcome in terms of getting it passed. there is no denying that there is opposition in some quarters of the electorate to trade deals. but mr. trump certainly is not articulated a proposal to counter the forces of globalization and ensure that middle-class families can compete and win in a 21st-century economy. president obama, on the other hand, put on a specific strategy. he's not making empty proposals.

he is engaging in the world and u.s. the influence of the to reach these agreements. we are getting close to a situation where we will ask congress to pass it. >> so the results in michigan don't change our strategy for how you will rollout your plan to get a vote>? sec. earnest: i don't think the result in michigan tell us something that we do not already know about the public's view, particularly the state of michigan. >> one more follow-up, president everyone -- any information whether he will come to the west -- to the u.s. for nuclear trade se-- sec. earnest: i cannot tell you his travel plans in general. many leaders will travel to the u.s. to discuss this national security priority. we will have some information later this month about who

precisely we expect to attend. >> isn't there a political upside for democrats to republicans blocking the presidential nominee? sec. earnest: i suspect that a member of the u.s. senate is willing to make the case that they will abide by their constitutional duty. than likely to fare better one member of the u.s. senate, who is publicly refusing to fulfill their constitutional duty. maybe that is more election analysis then i should do. there will be a transfer all of you to look at the question. -- a chance for all of you to look at the question.

[indiscernible] sec. earnest: again, i do think there is a challenge that republicans on the ballot in the fall will face about having to a u.s.the record of haste that certainly routinely -- not just opposed the president's proposals, but rejected their basic responsibility to govern. setting aside the supreme court, that is true of republican's refusal to even consider the plan we put forward to "gitmo" to even refuse a hearing on the president's budget. they canceled it before the president even put his proposal out. to say nothing of their long-standing process --long-standing promise to offer of an alternative to obamacare, something they have failed to

do, even though they have voted 60 or so times to repeal it. the same thing on gun control. so many important issues facing the country, it's not that revolutions are just saying no, they are refusing to's not do their job. that is problematic when most americans understand, that once you assume the majority in one of the legislative bodies of congress, that means they have a responsibility to govern. ostensibly that is why they are in the job in the first place, to have influence over running the country. they have totally abdicated that responsibility. that is a reputation that will be hard for republicans to shake. senate is't think the having a chilling effect on this problem choosing the supreme court nominee? sec. earnest: no, not at least on the president's ability to choose the nominee for the job. >> in legal parlance, what is

the harm in what the senate is doing? they are just taking a political posture, which you can't really fault them for. it's not having an ill effect and there is no nominee out there. what have they done that the white house thinks is wrong? sec. earnest: the in ministration --administration and american people fault them in congress for putting their political considerations ahead of their constitutional duty. that is part of the problem. even some of the polls your organizations have conducted are further eroding the already meager support that the congress has when it comes to evaluating their standing with the public. about the results of michigan from last night. you cited institutional reasons why democratic voters might be against the transpacific partnership. does the white house see any

difference between hillary clinton and senator center' positions? sec. earnest: i will of the candidates describe their positions. >> there is no white house stance on any substantive differences? sec. earnest: no, i would refer you to public comment. >> [indiscernible] new sanctions against north korea-- sec. earnest: within the last couple of weeks, the treasury department has announced a number of actions against the north korean government. i would refer you to the treasury department for information about those actions. importantys, what is

is the kind of response we have seen from the international community. we have seen russia, china, south korea, and japan come sanctionsn support of that go farther than ever in isolating the north korean government. these are sanctions that are intended to make it harder for the north korean government to collect revenue. they can be dedicated to advancing either their missile or nuclear program. we also know that some of these sanctions could have an impact on the extravagant lifestyle that is enjoyed by some members of the north korean elite. that is significant because right now it is decisions made by the north korean government of that are condemning millions of innocent north koreans to a life of poverty and hardship. and it certainly is inconsistent with the responsibilities that come with

leadership. the international community has spoken out strongly against this. we will continue to apply pressure to the north korean government until such time as they give up their nuclear program and begin to abide by the kinds of broadly accepted international standards that every other country abide by. >> will you take action immediately after the president's executive order? sec. earnest: for information on timing, i would refer you to the colleagues at the treasury prevent. --treasury department. >> after 39 hours of filibuster from democrats, a missouri senator approved a measure allowing organizations to review se service to same-sex

couples. hillary clinton and bernie sanders have come out in support of the filibuster. will the white house to the same? sec. earnest: it certainly sounds as if that particular withwould be inconsistent the values of justice and fairness and equality that this administration has long pursuit. -- has long pursued. if we have a more specific response to the actual bill, i will let you know. the president is quite proud have we have fought to advanc equality in this countrye. if a bille a shame like the one that you described were to deal that sent back. >> would you be personally offended if your home state has to measure that would allow lgbt

description -- lgbt discrimination? sec. earnest: it was certainly not be the first thing i would be bragging about if that were something my home state were to choose. alright? thanks everybody. >> join us this thursday for live coverage of the white house state dinner for canadian prime minister justin trudeau. beginning at 6:15 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> former first lady nancy reagan died last sunday in california at the age of 94. throughout the afternoon, at the ronald reagan central library, her body is lying in repose for visitors to pay their respects. we will watch for a few minutes.

>> an honor guard of the interest on the sheriff -- ventury county sheriff of the simi valley standing watch over nancy reagan, lying repose in simi valley, california through friday. the funeral service on friday will begin at 2:00 p.m. eastern, 11:00 pacific. it will be a private funeral with only family and friends and some of the invited guests will include abc's former correspondent sam donaldson, former house speaker newt gingrich, and entertainer wayne and you.

will have live coverage at to cut p.m. eastern -- at 2:00 p.m. eastern. you can follow on c-span radio and c-span.org. find out more on reaganlibary.com. earlier today, british prime minister david cameron told members he would not resign if the u.k. decided to leave the european union. members also questioned the prime minister on jobs, the british economy, and syrian refugees. this is 35 minutes. >> order. >> questions to the prime minister. thank you mr. speaker. this morning i had meetings with colleagues and others. i shall have further such meetings later today. >> arron smith. >> people in bristol south look forward to their share of the 3 billion apprenticeships. but the question how this is going to happen.

on the eve of national apprenticeship week, can the primary start tell us does he have a delivery planned, or is he making it up as he goes along? [chatter] p.m. cameron: we've achieved 2 million last parliament. we have a deliberate plan based on large companies continuing with their plans were partnerships. we want small committee to do more. we want the bowlers sector -- the public sector to join and. we regularly review progress towards the target. >> many of my constituents get the train to central london for work. they are concerned about the terrorist threats posed by daesh in the capital. can my right honorable friends update us on the efforts in iraq and syria? p.m. cameron: it was very

striking what assistant commissioner mark rowley said about the dangers that we face. domestically, we are protecting counterterrorism by policing and investing in security services, as we did in the last parliament. in terms of iraq and syria, we're making good progress in pushing daesh back. we need to do this both domestically and overseas. mr. speaker, i was completely appalled that the labour party has readmitted someone to the party that says, and i believe, but the 9/11 suicide bombers "must never be condemned" and belongs to an annexation that iraq.s the leader in i hope they will through this person of the party. chatter]and >> mr. speaker, i hope the promised her will join with me in mourning the death of the

andh beatle, george margin, the wonderful music you give us. last week, the prime minister told the house that we have a sound economy. if the economy is so strong, then why this week has it forced through 30 pound per week cut, hitting some of the poorest and most disabled people in the country? margin wasn: george an absolute -- george martin was responsible for some tunes that will live on ever more. disappointing he could not comment on the point we made earlier. they asked about the strength of the economy. we do face an uncertain international environment. all the experts are warning about the dangers that we face. as we speak today, we have inflation at 0%. we have on implement at 5%. our economy is going.

wages are growign. we are cutting the taxes that people are paying. that combined with reforming welfare, and we are reforming welfare, is the way to get our deficit down and help deliver for working people in britain. [chatter] >> mr. speaker, i don't believe the majority in this country or content to see someone diagnosed with cancer, reduced to poverty because of the cuts this government is putting through. in the summer budget last year, the chancellor found another $6.6 billion to reduce corporation tax for big business. despite our corporation tax already being lower than any other g7 nation. today, action for children, the children's society, the national children's bureau, shows that authority spending on children and young people has been cut by 2,000,000,071% --$2 billion,

71%. does this not demonstrate a wrong choice by the prime minister? [chatter] look at what happened to corporation tax receipts since we caught corporation tax. -- we cut corporation tax. sitting tax rates is to raise money rather than make a political point. corporation tax receipts are up by 20% under this government. so we have more money to spend on children services on education, whereas if we put up tax rates, we would actually get less money in. that is the result. they care about making a political point, we care about raising revenue and providing good services. [chatters] >> i asked the question mr. speaker, if there is more money available to be spent on children's services, why are there another half-million children living in poverty in britain? if we really do have the strong

economy that the prime minister claims, then white did -- then why did the chancellor warned last week "we may need to make further reductions." deductions for who? the disabled, women? is it going to rule out attacking those groups? p.m. cameron: you will see the budget next week. he has an excellent record of steering this nation's economy. the right honorable gentleman just made remarks about child part of a -- child poverty. there are 680,000 fewer workers households. households where someone is bringing home a wage, putting food on the table, and paying less taxes. there are 40,000 fewer households where no member has ever worked. 480,000 fewer children living in workers households. that is real change for those children.

all of these things were neverd. >> mr. speaker, the problem is the number of households suffering from in-work poverty because of the insecure jobs, because of zero our contracts, because of low wages. as he well knows, the poorest are paid the most, and women are paid for 81% of those cuts. on 99 previous attempts to ask the questions to the prime minister, i have been unclear or to satisfied with the answer. [laughter] [chatter] auspicious 100th occasion, can i ask the promised her to help out a young man? last week, the prime minister told the engineering employers

federation that we have a skills shortage. a good admission. a bright young man that wants to make his way in the world-- [laughter] says, will the government 6knowledge the importance of colleges and post-16 education services in britain? [chatter] p.m. cameron: first of all, let me congratulate the honorable gentleman getting to 100. welcome across the hatch. what rear introducing in our country is a situation where we uncap university place, so as many people that want to go can go.we will introduce 3 million apprentices. that combined with better funded colleges means that we actually have a proper education system that can drive opportunity in our country.

let me come back once more on child poverty. let me give him the figures. 800,000 fewer people in relative poverty than 2010. 300,000 fewer children in relative poverty than 2010. that is the labour measurement used. he can tell us he was wrong about job poverty when he gets them. [chatter] >> mr. speaker, the prime minister seems to be asking the last question-- if i can bring him back to last question and point out that there has been a 10% cut in real terms in further education and adult education, which has been cut by 35% during his time as prime minister. the construction output in britain has shrunk for 2 consecutive quarters. actually this is a matter of concern. isn't this a sign that this economic recovery is being constructed on sand?

have protectede 16 education in this spending round. of course we want to see every part of our economy growing. and our economy is going, unlike so many in what is a difficult and dangerous world. if you look at our construction plans, we are able to commit to hs2. we can commit to the biggest road programs as the 1970's. the largest rail programs since victorian times. with huge infrastructure projects in energy and other areas. those things are only possible because we have a strong and growing economy. we know what labour would do. its spending plans are a risk to the nation's finances. we know from scotland what he wants to do is to put up taxes on people earning over 20,000 pounds. that is their plan and it would wreck the country's finances. [chatter] p.m. cameron: mr. speaker -->> we have a construction

industry in recession when there is an acute need for housing. construction apprenticeships have fallen by 11% since 2010. we have the lowest rate of house building since the 1920's, almost 100 years ago. will the prime minister look again at this issue? future? >> i do have to pick up the right honorable gentleman on his statistics because we have seen a massive boost to apprentices and apprenticeship funding under this government. 2 million in the last parliament, 3 million is part of house building under labour fell by 45%. since then it has increased

two-thirds come over 7000 new homes have been delivered since 2010. if you look at what's happening, completions are up, housing starts out at the highest level since 2007. housing starts and nearly doubled the low point of 2009. they wrecked the economy, created that instability. we have been building a strong economy. that's what we've got to stick with. >> thank you, mr. speaker. unemployment is half since 2010. [shouting] given that they will make the signature can the prime minister usher the house he will continue to support quality education, employment generation to get jobs so maintaining a conservative laughter of aspiration? >> my honorable friend is right. the school to improve the program we are driving forward combined with uncap university places come investing in apprenticeships, that is giving people a ladder of opportunity to make the most of their lives

of the most that employment opportunities that are being beg created in a country where there are 2 million more people in work. i know he has a particular interest in his constituency in extending the robin hood line. that's exactly this sort of infrastructure project this government wants to get behind. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the refugee crisis is the biggest issue facing governments right across europe. is the prime minister ashamed that in the uk government program we now know that in fulsome trafficking victims were locked up without food, asylum seeking children were forced to sleep on concrete floors, that patients with diarrhea were denied access to showers, and also a naked woman was allegedly beaten at the detention center? is the prime minister ashamed of his? >> i will look very carefully at the point the right honorable gentleman makes. i would say that our asylum system is fair, and britain down

the ages has given people a silent who were fleeing torture and persecution. when it comes to the issue of resettling syrian refugees it was instructed at this week's european council with a chart showing how many countries have actually resettled the syrian refugees. britain has done far better than any other country bar germany. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this week the scottish refugee council called for an investigation into allegations about the way a silent seekers are treated and housed in moscow. they want the home office to commission an independent inquiry into claims of substandard housing and dehumanizing treatment of refugees by the private company contracted to provide accommodation services by his government. with the commission that investigation? >> we are very happy for these issues to be properly investigate. the home affairs select committee in this house of commons has just done report into the way that asylum housing

is commission and, of course, if the scottish parliament wants to carry out those investigations come of course the united kingdom government will cooperate with that. what we need to do is make sure when we take people in we make sure they're properly house, proper look after, their children are schooled because that's the sort of generous country we are. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i welcome the government's excellent initiative to encourage employers to hire ex-offenders. speaking as someone who myself employs a female ex-offender by the excellent work in charity for the prime minister usher the house of his commitments to ensure employers in the public private and charitable sectors play their parts of? >> i agree with my friend and i salute what he has done to help ex-offenders to i think the point is this. of course, if people are

applying for a job they have at some stage to declare the criminal record that they have and the offenses they committed. the question is do they have to do absolutely at the beginning? we believe in this idea of banning the box the civil service will introduce this site don't have to put that information on the initial cd. you might get in any view so you were not rolled out. giving sometimes people a second chance to make the go of their lives, we're putting our money where our mouth is. >> thank you, mr. speaker. if the british people both believe the european union, will the prime minister reside? yes or no? >> no. [shouting] [inaudible] over 2 million jobs are being

created since 2010. but nearly 1 million of those -- does the prime minister agree with me that the eu free movement of people is damaging uk national employment prospect and does contribute to the 1.6 million british people remaining unemployed? >> the point i would make to my honorable friend is that if you look at the figures over the last five years, two-thirds of the rise of employment over the last five years has been made up by jobs going to british people. where i would agree is in combination with the welfare reform we have introduced for eu citizens and the tougher control of migration from outside the eu, we should seek welfare reform in the uk as the flipside of migration control. we want to make sure it always

pays for british people to train, to do the jobs being made available so we should see immigration control and welfare reform together with the growing economy as the way of getting more of our people into work. >> thank you, mr. speaker. does the prime minister agree with me that it's very important that we make a positive case of britain remain in the eu, but each of us set 1200 pounds back, we have lower prices and choices to shop and with easier days in business. and the prime minister explain how our membership for the eu benefits so many aspects of our lives? >> i think the honorable lady makes an important point which isn't all the arguments about single markets as poverty and all the rest of it we can sometimes lose some of the simple consumer benefits of being a member of the european union. the things she mentioned about cheaper air travel, ease of travel, not having any tariffs, these are things we take for granted now but simply were not

the case for years ago. that's a strong part of a positive case we should make for remaining in the eu. but with her own constituency and might i think we should point to the enormous success of the british car industry which now employs and is responsible for over 140,000 jobs. that is a great european success story. a lot of those cars go to european markets and we want to picture that continues tariff free. >> thank you, mr. speaker. as security guarantees under nato and our action to meet our commitment is most welcome. i visited -- were the chinooks to do so much of united kingdom edited our friends overseas are based, will my right angle friend look at plans to improve the quality of accommodation for airmen and women which i'm sure he agrees they deserve? >> i thank my honorable friend

for the question and let me pay tribute to the pilots and all the crews that service of those helicopters. i think i visited afghanistan something like 13 times over the last few years, and their bravery under professionalism, their brilliance in flight often very low levels is remarkable and they have rightly been decorated and committed for the work they do. we have an upgrade program which will mean new helicopters replacing part of the existing fleet that is becoming one after i think i'm right in saying some 2 million pounds has been spent but i if more estate we will mae sure that happens. >> a 1949, aged 11 months by constituent william was diagnosed with polio. he has worked from the age of 16. he continues to work at 67 but following a clearly flawed assessment, he is set to lose his mobility car within three weeks. it says it will leave them unable to leave the house and

unable to work. will the prime minister urgently reviewed his case and the case of 14,000 disabled people just like that? >> i will have a case because what we found so far with personal independent payments is actually spending more money on disability rather than less money on disability. but i will look very carefully at the case. the whole point about this is that there is more of a proper medical assessment process to find out what is required. through her cannot also say to a constituent, i'm sure he like all others will welcome that we are so close to eradicating polio entirely from our world and this government is committed to going the extra mile and making that happen. >> schools were divided this week to see the publication of a conference presentation on terror funding.

given that the first part of this focus on the core principles, does my friend agree one of those principles must be to recognize that rural schools face a unique and unavoidable costs that are not well-funded and the the current ordered? >> i agree with my friend, it's right we are examining this formula and trying to achieve better fairness. i think everyone can see that the figures between the best funded schools and the worst funded schools, that gap has gone to greater also agre agreet will be vital for specific schools in rural areas are properly considered bigots want our consultation proposes we should a direct additional funding in small schools and sparsely public areas. >> to follow up, official figures show -- that's not the official figures show 12,000 vacancies in construction are hard to fill the to a lack of skilled applicants.

can prime minister explain why the number of construction apprenticeships have fallen under him? >> the point is we are building more houses big we are investing more in construction. we are training more apprentices. the money is a bear from the government, and now we're going to have the apprenticeship by the on the larger businesses that will make sure we can find apprentices along through this parliament. >> the prime minister will be aware of a recent tragic fatalities on the eighth 17 in my constituency. whilst we must await the result of a full english and police inquired full english and police inquired as he agreed it vital for local parish council is fully consulted when it comes to looking at new safety measures? >> i have heard about this tragic accident and ensure a half ago and should set our sympathies and condolences to those involved.

i think he's right is in so many of these cases the parish council has a lot of expertise about areas approach that are, things that could be done and, of course, they should be listened to this in other cases. >> on sunday we celebrated mother's day and just yesterday international women's day your members opposite rightly came to celebrate women on both occasions. why then has this government introduced cuts to public services, a freeze on child benefits and reductions in work-related benefits that have left mothers 13 billion pounds worse off a? >> the one thing i share with the honorable lady it was right to celebrate mother's day. i shared with my mother but i think i've said enough about her for the time being. and also it was a privilege to welcome to number 10 yesterday some inspirational women from all walks of life to mark international women's day. i am not saying this government has sold all of these problems

but we have more women in work. they're getting higher pay. they are paying lower taxes. they are getting more child care and are retiring with better pensions. when it comes to the things that government needs to do, we are appointing more women to senior positions come to public appointments. the honor system is properly reflecting women. someone shouted out what about the pay gap. the pay gap is now at its lowest public level. we have abolished the pay gap for the under 40s and when it comes to protecting women, this is the government that criminalized forced marriage. this is the government introduced the duty to report female genital mutilation but this is a government that set out a specific domestic violence measure. all of these would introduce players law so people can find out about violent partners. i accept this more to be done but let me say this to the labour party. one thing you can help with, no more segregated political meetings [shouting] that must end of the process of having

people with bigoted religious views treating women as second-class citizens. i think you all should take the pledge no more segregated meetings. [shouting] >> the uk still has relatively poor superfast broadband and far too many -- great work had been done but what will my right honorable friend be discussing with his right honorable friend the chancellor in advance of the budget statement next week in how we can improve coverage of further, particularly for rural, small businesses in areas like mine? >> i think my friend is right to raise the. since 2010 would nearly double the number of homes and businesses with superfast broadband. we are on track 490-95% target but there's more that needs to

be done and i think this is something members right across the house 10 years ago i think we were all rather guilty of leading campaign against all the rest of the. our constituents now want coverage for the internet. they want coverage for mobile phones. we need to make sure we change the law in all the ways that's necessary to make sure the marks are built to increase coverage amateur everyone is connected to the information superhighway. >> 76% for a bottle of whiskey tax. [inaudible] >> my right honorable friend potential and i have consistently backed scotland, scottish whiskey and bizarre industry but let me just say this. on the day the profit and loss

account comes out for scotland, you can see there's a 15 billion pounds a gap that scotland would face if it was outside the united kingdom. i dread to think what taxation would be had to be levied not just on whiskey but on petrol, on work, on incomes, on homes. that's the prospect of life outside the united kingdom. and that's why i am so glad we voted to stay together. >> thank you, mr. speaker. that governments have just presented, the government has just presented three white papers to parliament under their self-imposed legal duty to provide information under the european referendum act. the minister for europe, during the proceedings for houses, undertook to me that the government information under that act would certainly as he put it be accurate and impartial. the three recent white papers are not. my right honorable friend is the

enforcer. my right honorable friend is the enforcer of the ministerial code which demands they give accurate information to parliament. will my right honorable friend issue instructions to the foreign office ministers to review and correct these white papers? >> first of all let me say to my honorable friend, we believe in the sovereignty of parliament. parliament dictated that these documents would be published and that's why they are being published. on the question of the content, or content has been prepared by civil servants under all the appropriate codes. if he doesn't agree i would say to him and other colleagues, challenge the content. have an argument about the content. start having -- stop having on argument about the process. >> the prime minister's note will indicate to him that i raised the question of the crime unit early with industry. i am delighted to report that

it's funding has now been secured. it's now for the next four years i take full responsibility for that. i take credit on my website so it must be true. [laughter] but as my mother used to say, it never hurts to say thank you, and i do. can ask him on a similar matter how his manifesto commitment -- is progressing? >> can i thank him for raising such effective questions with such good effect. on the circuses are wild animals we have a manifesto commitment. we didn't manage to meet in the last parliament. we license of these associates i think we're not talking about one or possibly to circuses but we are still two, thank you very much, but we are committed to

legislative as time allows. >> noticed today colleagues him acrosacross the house and i wile launching a group on ending homelessness. will my right honorable friend join me in welcoming the work of organizations around the country including national health center in my own constituency and pledge to do all we can help homeless people and to address the causes of homelessness so we can end this problem once and for all? >> i welcome my honorable friend and the launch of the all party parliamentary group. we need to work on the issues on rough sleeping where we face charges at the moment that is good operations under way to try to do without end homelessness. at the heart of which is of the need to build more houses and that is why we have 8 billion pounds housing program to build 400,000 houses and we hope to build by the end of this parliament 1 million new homes. that is the key. all the arguments come down to providing effective homes. >> a friend of mine works a the

teen our week. can the prime minister imagine his shock when he discovered he was going to lose money as a result of the introduction of the living wage? that's because to introduce it, they're cutting allowances. as the result he's going to take him 50-pound week less, or 2600 pounds a year after the hourly rate goes up. can the prime minister and his chancellor in their budget next week ensure that nobody working on a shopfloor takes home less money? >> we want to see people make more money and that's why we've introduced a national living wage. we will be at nine pounds by 2020, and we are cutting the taxes of people like the friend to whom the honorable lady refers. who will be able to earn 11,000 pounds from the first of april before paying any taxes at

all. >> a recent study has shown biomass as progressed could say bill payers and the treasury billions of pounds. [inaudible] can the prime minister look at this as a sustainable business model and if violence continues in canada with a look at this so we can try to get into our program? >> i will look at this but what we ought to realize is the lead the control panel, the extra amount of money we are prepared to put into renewable energy is a finite amount and in the end we have to make sure what we did is cost effective electricity that we go green at the lowest-cost. that is the aim but i will look carefully at what my honorable friend says. >> it used to be said an english family's home was there council but following the conference housing bill, new tenants in

social housing will be on contract. does the prime minister thinks it's right the student beginning to secondary education may face eviction of every time they come up to their graduation? >> we want people to have their own home which is why we extend the right to buy from council tenants to housing association tenants so that millions of people will be able to own their own home. as for future tendencies would want to make sure the social housing is better for the people who need it most. no current 10 is going to be effected but that's what we think this housing bill will see more homes don't, more homes owned, more homes rented and will be good for housing in our country. >> order. >> point of order?

>> on thursdays "washington journal," our guests are the senior fellow at the center for american progress, and a senior fellow at american enterprise institute. joining us how to discuss age, and other issues could impact us. the health care plans of the front runners in this year's presidential race. c-span's "washington journal" thursday beginning live at 7:00 eastern. join the discussion. >> environmental protection regulators testified earlier today on the impact of epa regulations on states. some witnesses said federal intervention in local environmental enforcement was disruptive to commerce and insensitive to local needs.

while others complained that federal regulations did not do enough to keep air and water in their states clean. this is two hours.