both. >> in the event of us voting to remain, with the member states want to get back to business as usual immediately? his business as usual good enough for you? mr. cameron: it is absolutely you will fight to make sure we get a better deal it comes to trade for britain? what steps you planning to take on that? mr. cameron: in the renegotiation documents which are legally binding and irreversible there is a lot of material about signing trade deals more rapidly with the rest of the world. the deregulation agenda to make sure europe is more competitive. that is business as usual for the eu post-referendum. we should be focusing on that agenda. i would also make the point that some people say if we vote to remain, business as usual will be a barrage of regulations. i think we have got very good objections against that.

we are out of a closer union. it affects the way the european court will work. we have this guarantee that any power proposed being parsed -- passed from britain results in a referendum in our own country. there are risks to every course you take in life, but in terms of reducing the risks of staying, i think it's been done very effectively. >> you think negotiations are dead? mr. cameron: not at all. i think there will be a successful conclusion. i think r 13 rounds of discussions. a lot of what needs to be agreed on has been agreed on. it will take a bit on both sides. it's a very big deal for britain that could result in hundreds of millions of pounds of benefit for our economy. >> d think we could if done more for the industry if we had not been more in the eu? mr. cameron: i don't. output of thee

steel industry goes europe. it's our biggest market. as much as 40% of the output. b, if we were outside the eu, we could be subject to the same anti-dumping tariffs with respect to china. i don't think it would've been a good future for steel. when i talked give it a i was struck whether i was talking to the unions or management or anybody else, they seemed to think the same thing. >> prime minister, my committee, education, has little to deal with europe at all. i want to start off with the observation that the president of the united states set in 1975 executive obama said recently. no american president would ever question the need for us to be powers of the european union. that has been endorsed by the

prime minister of new zealand and australia. when we thinkrise about albania as an alternative source of economic trade and political strength? mr. cameron: one of the arguments i have become very aware of over the last few years is our friends in the world, countries from the, well for partners like united states, it's difficult to find a prime minister or president that things britain would be better off leaving the eu. this discussion about any has come up because one of the lead campaigns -- leave campaign's was saying our free-trade zone across europe, including countries albania or iceland, actually it's a bit of a misnomer. of all those states, they have separate agreements with the eu. theones in the balkans,

countries that want to join the reference ont some trade that they -- i will make the bigger point. what on earth are we doing thinking that a model for totain is somehow to try have the same deals romania has with the eu? i think the answer is, no we can't. what we ought to deliver the special status we have in the eu. the chair's original question. put it alongside previous things that british governments have done to demonstrate special status. britain is different. i'm not thinking we should accept italian membership or german membership in this organization. we're not been invaded in 1000 years. we have institutions that we revere and care about.

we have this extraordinary role in european history. s churchill said we are not of europe but we are with europe. let's have a statement reflects that. we can get it on the inside with a special status that we should build on. >> eight economists have joined the brexit campaign on reasons why we should leave. how does it stack up with the observations of oacd, which makes very plain that a month's salary per year would be lost for each person if we do leave the european union? have you contrast that with the widespread agreement from businesses that are best interest in terms of investment and jobs ought to remain in the european union? i am sure the committee would examine all these arguments in great detail. you have a weight of evidence, the bank of england, the imf, report from treasury, cpi and

other organizations looking at the economic arguments. they are all finding that when you look at the economics, the case for staying is very strong. the ones that came up for brexit , i think they make some fairly on assumptions like the rest of the world taking down trade barriers of this automatically. they don't seem to mind that if it led to a wipeout manufacturing that is something that we have to take on the chin. madenk that the arguments by those other organizations are very persuasive. from the treasury particularly, it was quite straightforward. it was making an argument about the benefit of the openness of our economy to trade with europe and the other countries we have trade deals with. and basically explaining if you go for something less or more restrictive, the canada model, you will suffer economically.

i think the most important opinions would agree with that. >> it would have about 6060 free-trade agreements to replicate what we are leaving -- 66 free-trade agreements to replicate what we are leaving. we would lose contact with european union to other markets. do we have the capacity to quickly and effectively conclude those agreements so less damage is being done to our economy? do you think it will take some time? mr. cameron: currently our eu 60%, ifals cover that we do the u.s. and japan deals a three of 83% so huge percentage will be covered by these deals. if the british people vote to leave, we will have to vote -- work hard to get these deals back in place as soon as we can. workingiculty will be at your trading arrangements with eu quickly.

it's been quite difficult the trade deals elsewhere. i think all the evidence is that it will take some time. particularly when you look at the canada deal that is taken seven years and is still not in place. the former head of the debbie t wto said swapping our participation in the single market, he described it as a terrible replacement. we would havey, 10% duty on our close, 30% on our close. 70% on our beef. these are very real consequences if you don't get a good and fast -- with his single market the single markets. >> if you're not worried about in or out, in a leadership role across europe and are allies and partners we've been quite successful. if you look in the single

market, that was a product of kerfield.hfield -- while we are actively can bring about real significant change. do you see the possibilities of that happening if we do decide to remain in the european union beyond the referendum? mr. cameron: i would just highlight a couple of things. i think because the economic problems of the eurozone members of and having, i think there is a recognition that when interest rates are close to zero, when government budgets are stretched, one of the best things you can do to grow your economy is have sensible deregulation and side trade deals with the rest of the world. the british agenda of doing this is something we can push very hard, which is why the part of my renegotiation have the most widespread support. i think we can very much lead on that issue which will be good for us.

it's true that it is let some of the british frustrations. --iously common rule can be there are other areas renting we could lead on. one is this issue of how we fight extremism and terrorism. in our country we have a lot of -- because what happened in 2005 and because of tooling up earlier in our capabilities to fight terrorism i think we are ahead of others in europe. that's an issue if we remain in the eu i would like to give as much leadership on if i could. >> [indiscernible] [laughter] can i commend you for minister on this support -- report which was unanimously agreed by committee split down the middle on the issue. help you by not having issues to money and sally's -- s. many aut sally'

we would probably go to the world trade organization within two years and negotiate the deal within two years. that's an agreed commission -- decision across the committee. mr. cameron: frankly i -- >> i want to challenge your assumption. eu is atmosphere of the towards a brexit, quite can't we negotiate a free-trade deal with anyone we choose? mr. cameron: my direct answer is that 44% of our exports go to the eu. it is such a crucial market for us. our businesses are integrated with it and i think it would be damaging for our economy if the left that for a long time and decided -- >> that's why the canadians and the americans take a long time. they are negotiating with 27 nations a complex deal. we would be faster getting agreement with other countries, would we? country to country negotiations?

mr. cameron: you might be able to do that but he had not secured the market -- >> you don't have a choice. mr. cameron: just think that means. if you are excepting wto rules coming in rather than it -- >> you know that. mr. cameron: the bottom line is you have 10% tariffs on your cars, 70% on your be. -- beef. >> the mutual interest in the deal -- mr. cameron: i want to make two quick points. the deal is mutual interest. i think we would negotiate very hard. of all the are 44% export goes to them. 8% of their exports come to us. the second point is never forget the important -- importance of services in our economy and financial services. if you lose the -- let me give you one example. >> but the prime minister

finish. said heron: a fellow thought we would lose 100,000 jobs a month because the passport issue. of any bank aspect or financial services country instantly set its services. if you say leave our relationship and we will get to wto rules and negotiate with there's the world, you face massive terrorists -- tariffs. they could make your economy much worse than the norway deal. >> i think massive tariff is something of an exaggeration. handlingask you, your of the government. outside of the special circumstances of renegotiation how much of your times giving to advancing or protecting britain's position in the eu?

outside of the special circumstance and renegotiation? how much time this eu business take up of your day? mr. cameron: i could probably write to you. 10 and 15 i between guess. >> how often do you -- mr. cameron: it's a very good question. there are a set number of european summit every year. a certain number of extra ones for emergencies. a certain amount of european diplomacy. there are domestic relations -- issues relating to europe. i would say 15%. the negotiation to go long time because i have visited every country, sometimes more than once. i reckon 15% that i will get back to you. >> how often are you speaking to the french president and german chancellor? mr. cameron: i would say probably the german chancellor

fortnightly, every two or three weeks probably. >> and the others? mr. cameron: i would speak to the french, german and italian for ministers probably more than others. it depends. it really does depend. you take recent weeks for we had this intensive action the migration crisis. i have been talking a lot because we've been playing a part. the siebel cannot come across our borders and we have played a big role in getting that deal with turkey to send people back to the greek islands. in germans and the french particular with their investigation with the dutch. to explore they evolution of your views and how you changed since you became the leader of the party. eppedok us out of the with some other colleagues. you say your view has

changed we see the value of the eu with security. if that's the direction of travel, why defend this? -- cameron: first of all there are things that have not changed. i think we need european reform. we are better with reform. i think he was right to come out of the european people's party. there another third-largest in the european union. and there is a party reform. influence. in terms of what i said about security, i think the argument i'm trying to make us i think 10, 15 or 20 years ago a lot of people said europe is about trading cooperation and political cooperation. security doesn't really come into it. in recent years i have seen how important that is. in terms of defense, nato is the cornerstone of our defense.

but where our eu operations are the best way to get something done, we should not object to that. for instance, the operation in ofalia to read the seas pirates. that was a british-that eu mission. british-led eu mission. >> the core debate of what the eu will look like in 2040. once the direction of travel on defense and security, is it there for people to see? thathat is your position it is starting to stop the development of an eu defense identity. that 450rting to mean million europeans and about 25 million americans. that is something we should be assisting in tracing that identity in the defense output. more importantly isidore said

travel in the euro zone countries -- is the travel in the eurozone countries, those interests are going to be so close and our interests will be so different that it is inevitable even with their protection you security in the renegotiation which is quite specific that they will be focusing about their interests. and the direction of travel and european union will inevitably the -- be away from the direction of united kingdom unless we're outside the eurozone. >> please hurry. >> if you arrive late for dinner with your mate, you will find they have decided we were going and there's nothing you can do. you can only decide whether to join them or not. mr. cameron: that was a very clear expression. i think the key to this renegotiation is it accepts we are not all heading -- not only

going a different speeds but a different destinations. --hink the europe of eurozone countries will integrate further preferred and will not be a part of that. we have to build on our special status. is it in our national interest to remain in the single market with protections against the pound being discriminated against by the euro? my opinion is yes. -- if you think it's going to integrate, let's get out because we cannot maintain special status. we would be discriminated against because we are in there with this special status. they can dictate that euros have to be cleared only in euros and countries. we know we can maintain london is a great financial center of europe because we have the protection. upgrade question. -- a brief question. you got my e-mail.

it is clear from britain's answer on the 14th of april is the government's intention to keep all websites and webpages that the government runs on the gov.uk website up during the 28 day period. i would advise this is against the law. i would now advises because counsel. clearmentally care -- ist it is a publication under section 215." mr. cameron: i wanted to hear directly from you about your views. my approach to this is we must abide by the law and never way. we are taking legal advice as you would expect. it seems to me the right thing to do is to make sure if there is a website, a government

website, it is not refreshed were updated during the period. i would just ask if it's necessary to take something down. that's an extreme position. i want to understand your concern about that. -- the courte of ruled leaving a notice on it golf club noticeboard is a continuing active publication. another more recent rulings, every time the server is hit by another request for page that constitutes republication of the material. i think you will find he cannot keep up that website. mr. cameron: we will look at our legal advice. >> expect a letter of action. mr. cameron: there we are. [laughter]

mr. cameron: it seems to me if taking that a website is a bit like saying you have to remove publications that people might already have from the government. >> that is correct. we will move on. on the trade union bill, he used to say and i quote there is a very simple principle here. giving money to a party should be active free will. money should be not taken out of people's pay package without being told about it properly. we have a crusty quoted as -- "theykey quoted as saying needed to support of the left within the u.k. to sustain the remaining vote. that played a part in the considerations and discussions that have taken place by the vote." how sure are you that the reformation -- referendum played a part in the trade union vote? mr. cameron: these are separate issues.

what happened with the trade union bill, which i'm proud getting to parliament and delivering of the manifesto promises, is in the house of lords. >> mr. mccluskey is wrong? mr. cameron: i have not seen his remarks. >> i just rented to you. he said passage of the bill because of the considerations and discussions that of taken place and the need to sustain the support of the left is in the broadest context on the challenge of the remaining vote. mr. cameron: what i would say is the two issues are separate. we lost in the house of lords. >> they thought they were going to get that through. mr. cameron: it was a pretty large majority. >> no discussion of the trade union. discussion between

government and a train unions -- trade union about the labor campaign about the passage of the trade agreement bill? mr. cameron: the better off campaign has been talking with trade unions as you'd expect. i think the prime minister's answer is needed on that point. mr. cameron: we've been speaking with them for months and with them do wholeheartedly support the campaign which they do. that is happening. that is good. the trade union bill is a separate issue i think that will be a success will be get the bill through. >> he used to say the u.k. needed "a charter of fundamental rights. our country had fund of all rights london for the eu charter for fundamental rights was invented.

" why did this formed a part of the negotiation? mr. cameron: it did. we got a restate in reference at the charter of fundamental rights created no new rights in british law. . which of think is important i think we can address this even further when we are on the issue of the bill of rights, which we want to see enacted during this parliament. >> when the treaty was going through we described the lisbon treaty portico -- protocols described was as a fig leaf and worship -- worthless. that it hasclear the rights much broader than those set out in the european convention apply for the european court of justice.

how can anyone have confidence if it will respect any legally binding agreements, even if they work within the treaties? mr. cameron: i want to address the renegotiation. of fundamental rights has not extended the ability of the european courts into the united kingdom to rule on rules and practices of the rights it reaffirms. we oppose the lisbon treaty. one of the reasons we are having this referendum is it was not possible to have a referendum on the lisbon treaty, even though it was a postscript to the document, the constitution a tiny blair said stand and deliver, at sign have earned run -- it's time to have a referendum. last year the ecg stated that legislation permitting the

public authorities have access on the generalized basis of electronic indications is incompatible with the eu charter on fun of the rights. -- fundamental rights. the u.s. attorney general clearly saw this as also the transatlantic information sharing which he described this as particularly disappointing. which is more important for national security? the agreement with the closest allies or the u.k. eu membership? mr. cameron: the five eyes agreement, eight altogether wantthing about it, they britain to stay in the european union because of in britain will be stronger, and more capable partner, able to get more things done for the we are fighting daesh for putin. they believe britain will be stronger, safer, and an even stronger partner for them. commercial bases

rather than national security. national security reaffirmed which is a national responsibility. i would listen to the five eyes partners about what they think is going to be creating a safer world for all of us. >> there is very little desire in scotland for an eu referendum. the majority of scottish people want to remain in the european union. given that we do not want this referendum, and only a minority and our want to leave, nation is eventually forced out against this collective national will? mr. cameron: i would challenger statistics. -- challenge your statistics. -- that was are markedly

little difference between scotland, england wales and northern ireland. the only way to improve the scottish people want to referendum is of the support candidates supporting referendum. that would have to be to conservatives, which is a very partial way to get the information. opinion polls are pretty clear. the scottish people wanted a referendum and that is what is happening. >> you are seeing that in the opinion polling. it's clearly stating overwhelmingly this got -- the scots would only be part of the u.k. those security eu membership. that was the best tenuous given what opinion polls are showing. do you feel the scottish people were perhaps misled by some of these characterizations about the eu?

mr. cameron: there are two questions there. somehow or people misled about what happened to scotland with respect to the eu? i think the truth there is it would've had a very difficult time getting back into the european union. not just in my view. the spanish friend minister threatened a veto in view of the head of the commission that was -- and also scotland henry joined the eu and the circumstances, it would have to join the single currency. it would not have a special status that we've united kingdom the second part of your question is what about the future. this is a united kingdom decision. as one united kingdom and except the result, whatever it is. accept the result in whatever

it is. kingdom whoe united cares about keeping the united kingdom together, the safe and sensible choices to stay in the european union. >> your message to the people of -- what do you say to your colleagues who say those of us want to leave the european union, there will be another independence referendum for scotland? prime minister cameron: it is a united kingdom decision. you will make your arguments. them isur message to taking a route to stay in this

-- surely you have a message to the scottish people. prime minister cameron: we are safer, stronger and better off in. you and i are veterans of these referendums. i wonder if you learned anything in particular from the referendum for dependents. -- independence referendum. are these exaggerated stories we are witnessing once again? do you think those are having on people of scotland? prime minister cameron: there are exaggerated stories. it depends on what sort. 100,000 jobs lost -- prime minister cameron: that is not my estimate.

that is what was said to me. itsked him to confirm because i was concerned about the scale of the figure. little --got very with nonsensical -- prime minister cameron: my interventions were overwhelmingly positive. we have worked together all these years. we will have a very bright and exciting future, not restrained by the european union, but we will be a better off country, etter able to get things done in the world because we are a member of this organization. natolike being a member of or the g20.

are we right to warn people of the consequences if we were to leave? yes, i think we are. i don't want to wake up on june 24 and people not say you did not set out all the concerns and worries. it is right to have this referendum, we should not be frightened of having a sovereign decision. the people will decide this. i've got no other agenda. i profoundly believe the better choice is to stay in the european union . >> why don't we hear more of that? the risks you've exposed to this country, the you wish you never

thought of this whole referendum business at all? prime minister cameron: i believe in democracy. thennot hold the people of scottish kingdom. not on myve said watch, i will not take that risk. said come on then, let's have a decisive referendum. that's what we did. there are divisions in our country. it is time to make that choice. we should not be frightened of sovereignty or this debate. we should not be afraid of discussing the upsides and downsides. >> there are currently 4217

centers,ational costing the taxpayers won her six 9 million pounds a year. should we have done better in removing these eu nationals? -- 169 million pounds a year. prime minister cameron: yes, we should have done better. to speed uponths the exit from the u.k. it has been difficult. even when you have signed agreements. it ought to be easier in europe. we had this directive on for national desk foreign nationals. -- on foreign nationals. we would take several steps

back. it has not been good enough. it needs to go further. at least we have a mechanism through the eu to do it. activateabled us to criminalsabyte 7000 -- extradite 7000 criminals. >> will you address the possibility that the country -- we will need to do so and so. "we" include you? prime minister cameron: yes. this referendum is about britain's future in europe. not one team of politicians or another team of politicians. i don't want anyone to trouser the decision-making. it is in or out. i will accept the verdict and do everything i can to put it in place. it heyou seriously think

f they run against you, you will be prime minister? prime minister cameron: is yes. we achieved a majority in parliament. that is the mandate i have. to hold a referendum. the majority of our manifesto programs delivering that, having referendum, abiding by the result, that is the right thing to do. we have not heard much since the renegotiations. one of your commitment is to reduce the immigration to the tens of thousands.

when do you think, if europe votes, you will reach that? prime minister cameron: in the general election, i said i wanted us to say to people coming from the eu, if you don't have a job after six months, you have to leave. if you do get work, you don't get access to all where her system -- our welfare system. the first two are now in place. you will get job benefits but only at your rate. at theorth looking international agreement that we did achieve. aboutis a lot in there

stopping criminals, stopping people who cannot support themselves. all of this needs to be taken into account. going back to the immigration issue, when i made that commitment, at that stage come immigration meant migration between britain and the rest of the eu. stage, the next migration coming into the u.k. was almost exclusively from outside the eu where we should do a lot to reduce it. we have done some, but we need to do more. i don't believe this is an unachievable ambition. it is tough and challenging, but a combination of what we are doing in europe, combined with the recovery of other european with tougher measures

, we do all these things, this is a realistic ambition. i have not set a date on it, but i want us to make progress towards it. your stance on turkey becoming a full member of the european union -- will that help you achieve your goal of tens of thousands? remotelyt think it is in the cards. i don't think it will happen for decades. , itou look at the facts requires unanimity of all european members, the french will have a referendum on it. if your boat is being influenced by consideration of turkish membership to the eu, don't think about it. -- if your vote is being

influenced. i said it in the house of commons. questions -- i used exactly those words. it is just a fact. >> you put innovation at the we have to cut other budgets to make difficult decisions. just under if it of the funds that does not-- take into account the value of collaboration for science and research. i think it is reasonable for research investors to have an understanding of what you are planning in terms of brexit.

i was not really clear what your response was when he put forward to you the proposal for the arrangements specific to britain. thee minister cameron: point i was trying to make to -- some people have hankered after a much bigger deal for britain that would be outside the rulemaking powers of europe. to me, that is not possible. we can have our special status enhanced by negotiation. or, we leave. the point i was making, i was reading his report in detail. to me, the idea of coming out of the eu, pausing your negotiations with your biggest

trading partner, going after other deals while tariffs kick in against your trading status with europe is a really bad idea. tell me what the picture would look like. there are a number of countries you do pay into access eu funds. a good example would be switzerland. when they had a referendum which restricted free movement, they were cut out from horizon 2020. the government had to institute a new program to stop the detrimental fact -- effect on science and innovation. prime minister cameron: the case for stay in is very strong because we out of the eu budget -- get more out of the eu budget then we put in.

like ast sounds dictatorship thing, but 93% of is beneficialch well is money that is spent and well targeted and it benefits our economy. if we were to come out and do the norway status, but maintain ourselves in the science program, how would that work? we would inevitably lose influence because we are not around the table all the time. we would not yet meetings where we cut the budget of the eu. norway was not there. they were not around the table. i was. that was one thing we were able to secure. when it comes to science and research, the argument is very clear. that is why universities are almost uniformly against. >> do you think it is necessary

for estimating free me from an -- free movement of people to access those funds? how will you replace that 8.8 billion going into our science and innovation background over the last decade. >> the single market consists of free movement of goods, services , capital and people. it is not free movement of terrorists or murderers or people who cannot support themselves. it is free movement to people who want to work. that is what the single market involves and it is hugely appearedl to britain and involves us in this science and research that is very good for us. like norway,uted that is not a good outcome because you don't have a say of how much is spent.

i think it is a bad outcome and you would be at risk. out of we do if we come funding science? >> how does that impact your sciencent of our sector? companies do not own the i.t. that they gather from the research which they conduct an eu funded projects. even if we paid into eu collaboration, we would not be able to exploit that research. has there been any impact assessment on what would happen if we came out of those countries? prime minister cameron: that is a very good point. i was not entirely aware of that. that proves it is rather serious. a canadaplications of

or norway style model. i will look into that. loaded.ments are very isthe message to researchers it would be better for them to stay campaigning for that, but in terms of the brexit plan, we --'t know what they are prime minister cameron: a lot of these questions are for people who want to leave. i'm setting up the case for why we should stay. science and research is a very good thing if we vote to leave my want to make sure we continue to support science. we've been doing so in a situation where, if our economy took a hit like the forecast suggests, we could be 36 billion pounds down.

voted towitzerland restrict freedom of movement, they were instantly suspended from access to the horizon 2020. if i could gently propose, it might be a good idea to have a contingency plan in place in case such events haven't -- happen. prime minister cameron: i don't think this with model is a good one to follow. for exactly the reasons you give. -- this was model. model is a good one to follow. that would mean not being involved in the horizon science program. the thing for researchers and scientists and universities to impose on. >> i took a look at the and took part of this

a look at a speech he made 18 whats ago in which you say we don't need is some arcane mechanism in the you that the eu that would be triggered by the european commission and not by us. this has been struck. it is a rather arcane deal triggered in fact not just by the commission, but also by the council and even requires support of the european parliament. is that correct? prime minister cameron: the point is this. yes, it is quite an arcane mechanism. negotiatingg in

this one thing was to make sure you're qualified instantly and that it lasts for the longest possible time. written qualifies for this mechanism. it is the phasing in of well. -- britain qualifies for this mechanism. in this ithasing will still be operational in 2024. that is quite -- to agree the of benefits for other eu citizens for 2017-all the way to 2028. that is a pretty powerful mechanism.

for 2017 all the way to 2028. >> you are agreeing this is an arcane mechanism. i have not asked the question yet. agreement from the commission. prime minister cameron: they've already given it. that is the point. you are agreeing that it also requires the european parliament. this deal will be done on the basis of a regulation and regulations will require their agreement. on annexister cameron: six in the legally binding thement, it says this -- european commission considers the information provided to it

by the united kingdom and particular does not make full use of the transitional periods of free movement of workers and is intended to cover -- u.k. will be justified in triggering the mechanism." that was agreed to by the council of ministers. today on a mechanism that lasts until 2028 -- annexook a good look at six. it applies to definitions today, not some other day. those conditions may change in the future. prime minister cameron: they are not going to change by june 23. as soon as the referendum is over come if we vote a income of in place.e put the sooner it can be put in place, the better.

>> my second point, this does require the agreement of the european parliament. they may decide to do what they want . prime minister cameron: the president of the parliament was in these negotiations he has said i can give you a guarantee that the european parliament will come immediately after the -- thedum to stay european parliament does not have a veto. he was in these discussions. >> and view that all these european parliamentarians copied? prime minister cameron: i met the head of the ecr, the head of the labor group -- the point

, all of them have accepted the outcome of this negotiation. i think we should go ahead and boot on june 23 in the expectation that this will be put in place. -- go ahead and vote on june 23 in the expectation that this will be put in place. >> this is going back to brussels. can you be a bit more precise and what should be done and promise that you will personally -- so that farmers are not moving this cash? prime minister cameron: it has million -- from million to about 50

million. we are confident we can get that done. the uk's good practice has been recognized. in our gooderence practice in procurement -- prime minister cameron: we had a the procurement agency as it was set up in 2005 and it has taken a long time to get over that. the argument that we need to do better, yes, but there is a case for having some sort of mechanism to make sure that european countries spend the money effectively. a lot of the times, the capacity of states to spend money effectively is a massive problem. >> farmers and others --

prime minister cameron: i have a lot of farmers in my community. >> may be your focus is not yet achieving action. prime minister cameron: when it comes to getting the most out of our money, whether it is european investment funds or money available for innovation, research and the rest, we have a good record. >> i want to come back to something i put to you privately many months ago. about a year ago. i then published it as a proposal to reverse this eu racket of ever greater regulation. interested --e some inkling of it has appeared in the agreement.

quite an important step. we might be able to roll back body of rules at the eu level. there is a problem with it, a fundamental problem. this proposal you have negotiated is to be run by the commission, which is scarcely independent. pass.bound to others have commented on this. i would like to read you what the governor of the bank of england is saying about this publicly. its effectiveness, this mechanism should be a completely independent check on the process, the legislative process and separate from the institutions involved in that process. that is an essential flaw to

this otherwise quite attractive proposal, isn't it? prime minister cameron: i remember our conversations about it. i can see merits and having a separate body trying to do this. a my experience, if you want bureaucracy to deregulate, you have to make the bureaucracy createate rather than someone else to do it. you introduce one regulation, now it is two more, that changes the culture and the amount of regulation. of the legally binding document. >> did you press for independence? prime minister cameron: i discussed it with them, but i felt this was a better answer. my sense is this is a very different commission than the previous two commissions when you look at people like the

prime minister of estonia, the prime minister of finland, they've got strong pro-business traders in theee commission. you see an 80% decline -- this does make a difference. >> unless we address this fundamental problem at the heart of the eu, we will continue to --e discontent, even if prime minister cameron: we have to demonstrate that european ,ommon rules are proportionate they don't go into the nixon crannies of life -- nokes and crannies of life. that is the challenge.

we want the benefits of the single market. that does mean some common rules. on too many occasions, europe has regulated areas that are unnecessary. this starts to create a reverse ratchet because you have targets for deregulation and the rest of it. >> you've been answering questions for 90 minutes now. i think you've got to go. you've been answering quite a number of questions -- it would be helpful now if you were given an opportunity to explain why, in a nutshell, you think we should remain in the eu, given the reasons you've heard this afternoon. prime minister cameron: this is a choice for a generation, potentially for a lifetime.

say the european union is perfect. it needs reform. by changes have created some very worthwhile reforms. of hardheaded calculation of what is best for our country, whether it is the stronger economics, being able to get things done in the world, keeping ourselves safe against tororists, got no hesitation say we are better off voting to remain in. does do that, the reform not end. i'm not saying let's just simply calculate the economics and safety and security. there is a big argument about britain. britainnt a big, bold getting out to tackle climate standing up to russia or making sure iran does not get a nuclear weapon or fighting to confront terrorism, being in the european union does not restrict

our power to get things done, it increases it. there is a strong patriotic case to be made to stay in institution that is imperfect , justme in my view because the institution is not perfect, you don't walk away from it. >> what is your answer to the that slowly, our sense of identity is being weekakened? i don'tnister cameron: feel any less british for being in the european union. we are a different country, we are special. -- we don'tieve in even want to join the single currency. we are strong, we get things

done. we are an amazing country. we don't give up our national thisity by being part of organization, just as we don't give up our identity by being part of nato or the g20. away fromnot walk institutions that help us win in the world. it is a positive case and i will use the next 50 days to make it. >> thank you for giving us the evidence this afternoon. i know you have an important .ngagement to get to pick there have been some direct answers to our questions. prime minister cameron: thank you very much. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> the eu referendum is on june 23 and london's guardian

newspaper has more on their website. validating the rights of the 2 million britons living in the you after brexit. -- the eu after brexit. negotiations might have to be prolonged beyond the two years allowed for, although the european parliament and individual member states could jeopardize an extension of the process, according to the house of lords european union to midi. best committee. -- european union committee. c-span2erage on beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. >> questions to the prime minister. prime minister cameron: thank you, mr. speaker. whole house

will want to join me in congratulating manchester city on winning the premier title. rs at the start of the season. they showed incredible resilience and a great team ethic. mr. speaker, this morning i had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, and in addition to my duties in this house, i shall have further such meetings later today. >> may i start my associate myself with comments about the victory. the foreign secretary said there's a need for an initiative in dialogue to keep it alive. will prime minister with drone strikes which have done nothing to bring about peace and redouble his efforts to securing political resolution to war to a new dialogue as recommended by the foreign secretary? >> i think we should do both things which is to continue to

hit daesh terrorists because they threaten our country but at the same time do everything we can to support dialogue between opposition and the syrian regime which is what the process of been about and will continue to take both of those steps. >> my right honorable friend will be in -- standing in the city collected. and labour will lose some seats. we are all aware of the need for tolerance standing out from racism and anti-separatism and 10 -- anti-semitism. [inaudible] >> certainly i wish my honorable friend as well. if want a well-run services at a good cost and keep taxes down

come it's right to vote conservative right across the country. the point he makes about hamas is important we should be clear about who they are. they are a terrorist group who believe in killing jews and that's why whatever the right honorable gentleman says about combating at the semitism and the labour party will mean nothing until he withdraws the remarks that they were his friends. he needs to do it and he should it today. >> jeremy corbyn. [shouting] >> thank you, mr. speaker. i join a transfer in congratulating lester said the other amazing achievement. i hope it's not indication he will support another football team or is he going to stick with the qb scott already? [laughter] -- stick with the thank you he has already? later today, mr. speaker, commemorations began for holocaust memorial day in

israel. i hope there is agreement right across all parts of this house in sydney our best wishes to those commemorating the occasion. and sending a clear statement that anti-semitism has no place in our society whatsoever and we all have a duty to oppose it. tomorrow, mr. speaker, people will go to the polls in council elections in england. night of the two most deprived councils are set to see cuts high than the national average. with a facing cuts more than three times the national average. the means less money for youth services, adult social care and for those in areas of greatest need. that prime minister used to say we are all in it together. what happened to that? >> first of all let me join the right honorable jo joe and said yes, of course we should always support holocaust memorial day whether it is here in the united kingdom where we have commemorations or indeed an issue. i'm going to present on this point because he did say this.

he said it will be my pleasure and my honor to host an event in parliament where our friends from hezbollah will be speaking. i've also invited friends from hamas to come and speak as well. hamas and hezbollah believe in killing jews, not just in israel but around the world. so will he take this opportunity because if he wants to clip the problem that the semitism in the labour party now is a good time to start. withdrawal they are your friends. [shouting] >> mr. speaker, i've made it very clear labour is an antiracist party and is no place for anti-semitism within it. we have suspended any members that are undertaken any anti-semitic activities come work or statement have established an inquiry. [shouting]

the points he was making earlier relay to a discussion i was hosting in order to try to promote the peace process, and it was not an approval of those organizations. i absolutely do not approve of those organizations. mr. speaker, the reality, the reality is that volatile people are being abandoned in this country. that prime minister said that social care and support for the elderly is a priority for him. so if that's the case why has he got 4.5 billion since 2010 from the adult social care budget leaving 300,000 older people without care and support they need to live in dignity? >> first of all we are putting more money into social care and allowing councils to raise the tax to put that money in but i'm afraid he's going to have to do this one more time. he refers to hamas and hezbollah as his friends.

now, he needs to withdraw that remark. let me give them another chance. are they your friends or are they not? because those organizations in their constitutions believe in persecuting and killing jews. they are anti-semitic organizations, racist organizations. he must stand up and say they are not his friends. [shouting] >> jeremy corbyn. >> mr. speaker, obviously anyone that commits racist acts or is at the summit is not a friend of mine. it's very clear about that. very clear about that. i would also invite him to think for a moment about the conduct of his party and its candidates in the london mayor election. [shouting] the way in which they systematically spearing my friend who is our candidate for mayor. i wish them well and i fight the prime minister to undertake --

invite -- the conservative party disses connectivity. last week, drinking the foundation report found 1.25 million people in britain were unable to afford the essentials needed to eat, stay warm, clean and dry. the number of people using food banks has risen again last year. that prime minister usually lectures us about a stronger economy. wimbledon stronger economy means that fewer people need to use food banks? >> what the stronger economy means is there are over 2 million or people in work than when i became prime minister. now you can earn 11,000 house before you pay tax and we don't introduced a national living wage something never done 13 years for labour government. i completely reject what he said about labour's candidate for the london mayor.

i would make this argument, we are not responsible for everything someone says when they share a platform with us. we can't control everyone who appears in the picture but it is a pattern of behavior which the honorable -- [shouting] he shared a platform with a man who trained the ringleader of the 7/7 attacks and accused the united states of bringing 9/11 on themselves. he shared a platform with an extremist who called for jews to be drowned in the ocean. when this was put to the honorable member, this is what he said. he described it as mere flowery language. if he wants to know why has a problem with anti-semitism, is because its candidates share platform after platform after platform with extremists and anti-semites, and to excuse their words. one more time, so you withdraw the remark about hamas and

hezbollah being your friends. [shouting] >> mr. speaker, last week the prime minister tried as he often does to spare my friend the member by his association with sullivan. it turns out that he is an active conservative supporter. who hasn't shared platforms with the honorable member from richmond. he also should reflect on the words set by lord lanza we some years ago that racism was intimate within his party. we have set up a commission of inquiry. i suggest he might think about doing the same thing. the former housing chief has said the housing bill effectively removes the security that people need. it is fundamentally wrong. homelessness is up by a third since he became prime minister

and rightly again this year. a voter wrote to me this week and said he and his family will lose their hold if the government housing bill goes through. why can't the prime minister politics ever set by the welsh labour government in placing -- [shouting] in placing him in placing a legal duty, a legal responsibility on councils to help people during the housing crisis? why can't he do that? >> i'll tell you what this government has done not in wales but here in england we built twice as much council housing in the last six years as labour did in the previous 13. i'm not going to let this issue rest about the honorable member to gain. he raised the case of sullivan who is a member, shared a platform with nine times. this is a man who says it's

wrong to stop people -- as long as it takes. you want to know, do you want to know the views of the person that your reader has just quoted. he described women as -- [shouting] >> the honorable member might be interested in this. he described women as subservient to men. he said that homosexuality was unnatural act. he stood on a platform with people who wanted an islamic state. that is why his attempts to do with anti-semitism are utterly condemned to failure. because he won't even condemn people who sit on platforms with people like that. >> jeremy corbyn. >> mr. speaker, i did point out to prime minister, trying to help them but the gentleman is a conservative. so maybe he would care to think about that anti-but also

consider that a former conservative parliamentary candidate said this at the tory mayoral campaign. i'll be voting labour of a lifelong tory voter an ex-candidate, i am ashamed of the repulsive campaign of hate. so, mr. speaker, in fact homelessness has been reduced by 67% in wales, and since the new regulations came in. why can't he do the same in this country? inequality of course is getting worse. education ought to be a route out of poverty but new figures show the number of people participating on a level to adult education course in the first half of this year fell by a fifth compared to last year. how can we tackle inequality when the prime minister's government take away the opportunity for people to find a pathway out of poverty? >> he talks with inequality.

and equality has gone down under this government. to our 764,000 fewer worker households. there are 449,000 fewer children living in workplace household. why? we have a growing economy, a living wage, more jobs, people paying less taxes. that's what's happening under this government. once again i say to them, we are investing in the schools to get people opportunity. investing to allow people to own homes to give them opportunities. he opposes all those things because the truth is this, he may be a friend of the terrorist group hamas but he is an enemy of aspiration. [shouting] >> jeremy corbyn. >> mr. speaker, politics is about choices. that prime minister can't -- [shouting] >> order, order.

order. order. let me very gently say to the assiduous but slightly overenthusiastic andra gentleman member that his role is to be seen and not heard. no further from the honorable gentleman today or his sidekick to his right, which will not shout people down in this chamber. be quiet or leave. very simple. jeremy corbyn. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the prime minister government is cutting income tax with the riches, cut capital gains tax, cut corporation tax again and again. at every turn they make the wrong choices. tomorrow people can make their own choices about the crisis of social care, the housing crisis in this country, the unprecedented cuts to local counsel in areas of greatest need. accounts to for the education taking opportunities away from young people.

the choices to be made, they cut taxes for the rich. we want to ensure that there is proper taxation to ensure that are decent services for the re rest. >> he's right, tour is about choices big you can choose a party does on the side of security for hard-working people who want to make sure the are more jobs with better pay, lower taxes, good schools for your children, a seven-day nhs therefore you when you needed, or the other choice. you can back it party that puts extremist overworking people. and that is utterly incapable of providing the leadership your local council needs for our country needs. [shouting] >> thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. speaker. does my right honorable friend agree in order -- powerhouse that can produce innovation and prosperity come investment is

needed. of particular concern to my constituency, the junction. will the prime minister meet with me to discuss how we can keep traffic moving into and out of the great city of manchester and alleviate congestion in my constituency? >> my friend is right to raise this and that's why we established transport to the north to look exactly at schemes like the one she proposes so that we can speak with one voice. it's our investing 13 billion transport across the north over the parliament, plan for the next strategy after 2020 is also now underway so it's the right time to make the point that she does. >> mr. speaker, last week the prime minister, last week the prime minister took issue with a raised the issue of unaccompanied syrian refugee children in europe and the transports of the 1930s.

since then he has been written to by sir eric rice, the chairman of the transport association of jewish refugees and he wrote, the echoes of the past hot many of my constituents that i. i feel it is incumbent on us to once again demonstrate our compassion and human kindness to provide sanctuary to those in need. why has it taken so long from the threat of a parliament defeat to begin changing his mind? >> first of all let me pay tribute to the gentleman that the honorable member raises, and also let's be clear that no country has done more than britain to help when it comes to syria and refugees. no country has raised more money and only the united states has spent more money but i do want us to proceed with as much support as we can. i think it's right to stick to the principle that we should not be encouraging people to make

this dangerous journey. i think it's right to stick to the id we keep investing in the refugee camps and in the neighboring countries. i also think it's right not to take part in the eu relocation and resettlement schemes which have been invited a failure. we are already taking child migrants in europe with a direct family connection to the uk and will speed that up. and also talking to save the children to see what we can do our particularly with children who came your before the eu-turkey deal was signed. because as i say again what i don't want us to do is to take steps that will encourage people to make this dangerous journey here otherwise, our actions however well meaning they could be could result in more people dying rather than more people getting a good life. >> last week i i choose the prime minister up walking by on the other side when the defendant has been policy opposing further help for unaccompanied refugee children in europe.

so if what we are hearing that is indeed the beginning of a u-turn, i very much welcome it and i'm sure to all members on all sides of the house. i encourage them to think more about what can be done given of course that the transport help 10,000 children from europe. to what i ask the prime minister vowed to take the opportunity to thank lord at all campaigners have worked so hard for the uk to live up to the example and spirit of a kindred transport? >> i certainly think all those people deserve recognition for the work they've done to put this issue so scored on the agenda. let me just say again i do reject the comparison with a kindred transport. for this reason. i would argue that what we are doing primarily which is taking children from the region, taking honorable people from the camps, going to the neighboring countries and taking people into our country, housing them come close in them, feeding them, because they can have a good

life here. that to me is like a kindred transport. to say that it is taking today children from france or germany or italy, countries that are democracies i think that is an insult to those countries. but as i've said because of the steps that we are taking it not be necessary to send an and in the back to the other place, the amendment it does not now mentioned the number of people. we will go round the local authorities and see what more we can do but let's stick to the principle that we should not be taking new arrivals to europe. >> the department of health are looking to introduce a dna test for pregnant women in order to reduce the number of miscarriages, but this will have unintended consequences of increasing the number of abortions for those with down syndrome. i know there's nobody in this house secures more about those

with special needs for protection and so will the prime minister meet with me and representatives of the east support group in order we can look at ways of protecting those with down syndrome and that they were not be simply screened out? >> i think my honorable friend raises a very important issue, actually a local group of down syndrome parents came to my constituency on friday and made all these arguments to me. as a constituency, i taking this up with the department of health to make sure all the right processes are followed, the our moral and ethical issues that need to be considered in these cases. but on the other hand, we have respected the views that women want to have screening and testing about the health of their children and we should be in favor of maximum transparency on the basis that it is optional rather than mandatory but it is part of routine care. so the health sector will have

to find a way through this want above all to make sure we go about it in the right way. [inaudible] businesses i believe the eu. >> i listened all the business voices particularly those in manufacturing, so many who say we're better off in a reformed european union. we get an enormous amount of investment particularly from japanese motor industry. i will be welcoming the japanese prime minister to more were i'm sure this will be on the agenda. >> doctor julian mr. lewis. >> number 12 mr. speaker. >> nato is the cornerstone of britain's defense but our britain's defense but are placed

into you in my view, is the lower part of protecting our national security. i would argue it helps in two ways. first by ensuring the issues are so by dialogue and seconded to feith assistance in particular circumstances for example, the balkans. >> i entirely agree about nato because he accept that whilst the curatorships off an attack democracies or other dictatorships, democracy seldom if ever go to war with each other. if the name of the eu is we're constantly told to prevent conflict between its own members as in world war i and to come is it not heading in precisely the wrong direction by trying to create an and elected supranational government of europe which is accountable to nobody? >> my honorable friend has very long-standing passionate views on this issue. i would make a couple points. first of all i don't think we

should forget some of the countries now in the european union until very recently were democracies but were indeed forms of dictatorship. the second point i would make is those countries that i've worked towards membership of the eu have had to put up with all sorts of democratic and other norms to help them on the way. the final point i would make is that we'v we have had an unparad period of peace and prosperity in europe, and my argument would be whether you want to attribute all of that to nader or some of the to the eu, why would you want to put it at risk? >> the findings of the nhs england reports into closure of the mental health hospital in york has concerned the relationship and authorities between all nhs bodies -- [inaudible] our dysfunctional and have failed patient safety. healthwatch report shows have occurred since life has been lost. will the prime minister not

accept that his health act has to change due to the serious pashtun in line with nhs england recommendations speak with i would carefully of what she said but my understand is that she called for action on an outdated and dangerous facility back in july last year. that is exactly what happened or i'm pleased action was taken. it was not fit for purpose. they identified serious and life-threatening issues on patient safety. they were put right and so as a result those places close as obsolete we opened the facility after changes. so of course you're going to have instances of poor practice but what matters is do we intervene fast enough to put them right? in this case i look again at what she said but it does look as if action was taken. >> the christian you see these and pashtun yazidis are suffering and we should

recognize it. may i urge the punisher to indeed get more to replicate the data transport of the 1930s? that is what we are doing in taking children directly from the camps. if we were to take 16 year old from a safe environment in europe we would simply be causing more misery at encouraging the people traffickers. >> my friend basically asked me two questions. when his whether more we can do to label what is happening as genocide. this house has -- under legal definition i believe very much that it is clearly heading, a very strong case for saying it is genocide and help it will be portrayed and spoken as such. on the issue of the kindertransport i would agree with them. we've got an enormous amount we can be proud of. the money we put into the camps, the fact we raised more in

london on one day get any humanitarian conference has ever raised in history of the world. we've got a strong record. we are going to do more for children who are already registered in europe before the eu-turkey deal but the principle we should try to cling to is that we should not do anything that encourages people to make the perilous journey. that's been the cornerstone of our policy and it should remain the case. >> for the benefits of the house and for 10 and 11 year old up and down the country will the prime minister explained with the past progressive -- would differentiate between -- [inaudible] >> i have to say the whole point of these changes is to make sure our children are better educated than we are. [shouting] and that's what i'm delighted with children going off to do

the test. i'm delighted they are going to be. >> thank you, mr. speaker. three years ago, three-year -- >> order. i want to hear his inquiry. >> thank you, mr. speaker. three years ago, five members of the cockburn family were killed in a tragic accident in my constituency. the recently concluded inquest, the corner said at a conference in the work of the proposal by the highway authority to remedy this situation. the council wants to do all they can to carry out the work in fulford however resources are limited. goodbye right honorable friend give series consideration for additional resources to avoid a future tragedy? >> i will have a close look at the issue he raises. i know the importance of the road for his constituency and

have a look at what the high what agency is made available and whether there is real evidence that more can be done to make it safe. >> thank you, mr. speaker. eritrea was described as north korea of africa and the recent inaugural all party group meeting. the uk -- will the prime minister urgently review guidance which -- [inaudible] >> i will look at what he said. we know it is a deeply undemocratic and autocratic country that is the appalling things as people and that's one of the reasons why so many of those seeking to cross the mediterranean normatively being rude have come from the country. we had the opportunity to meet the leadership as i did at the conference, i made this point very strongly. >> four years ago i asked my

right honorable friend on behalf of my mother if the eu referendum vote would be brought forward because of her age. she now wishes to know if she needs to set a world record for longevity before the chilcot report is published? [laughter] >> i think i can -- i think i can reassure your mother that this summer she will have i think a double opportunity to do with these things. a referendum on june 23 i'm sure the chilcot report will come not too much longer after that. spiff i rather imagine she will want a backbench debate on the matter. [laughter] >> -- wishes to complete the sale of its uk assets by the middle of june, that it wants baby in place by the end of this month. does the prime minister really

think that's a realistic timeframe and there will be a credible process of due diligence? what steps has he taken to ensure that deal delivers to be a responsible set out the? >> the honorable gentleman is right about this. the positive news is that the deadline yesterday was met by a number of serious inquiries of interest into buying all of torture and that is good news. we need to work intensively with parker, with those bars to get the list down to those who are really seriously intended to bid for the business buddies right it's a short timetable. he asked what we're doing. we are talking intensively to make sure they do everything they can to make sure this is a serious sales process. >> prime minister made a very important announcement with regard to refugee children. but time is of the essence because of a peculiar vulnerability, children without

the guidance and protection of the families. could the prime minister is an indication to the house how quickly he expects to have those arrangements in place? >> i'm very grateful to my right over front do spoken passionately about this issue. idles any reason why there needs to be a long delay. we need to hurry out conversations with local councils because many are already did in the south of england under pressure because of the number of child refugees who have comes we need to carry out those conversations and hopefully we can make progress during this year. >> documents leaked this week confirmed what most of -- transatlantic trade investment partnerships makes unacceptable concessions to public health and safety regulations, all things -- [inaudible] will the prime minister recognize -- [inaudible]

>> this is the reddest of red herrings i have to say. the health service is completely protected under this agreement as it is under other agreements. look, there are all sorts of reasons people might be against free trade and wanted to see an expansion of trade and investment and jobs. i think we should honest and say we want to see these things happen rather than fighting total but herrings getting in the way of what can add tens of billions of pounds to our economy and bring jobs to our country. [shouting] >> calm yourself, mr. campbell. you are supposed to be a senior statesman here in the house. calm down. take up yoga, i've told you before. sheryll murray. >> by constituents celebrated 150th anniversary this year. will my right honorable friend join me in congratulating and thinking not only -- but all of

them who keep us safe? >> i'm very happy to do that in conjunction with my honorable friend come and inquiry brave people having that some of them particularly during the flood episodes we've had in recent years. i know that in its professionalism and dedication they bring to the des task and o put their lives at risk all the time. they really are the bravest of the brave. >> number 13, mr. speaker. >> what matters is what works and allows the government to make long-term decisions in the long-term interest of the country. in my view, five year fixed parliament are important part of that. >> can the prime minister ensure the government performance also includes the long overdue creation of a center evidence of sexual abuse of children? something i first raised with margaret thatcher in 1989. we can do with the awful consequences of child sex abuse, but we must also use early

intervention expertise to stop it from happening in the first place. will the prime minister thank the excellent work of ministers and members from all parties and get much-needed what work center up and running without delay within the five year term of this government speak was i'm glad the honorable gentleman rescued his own question with those last words. we are grateful to him. constitutionally. [laughter] >> i'm sorry to say a question 1989 takes a lot to get an answer but i can tell the setting up a center of the expertise of sex abuse is exactly the home office is doing. it will play a significant role on what works to prevent and deal with sexual abuse and exploitation alongside this the department of education existing work center -- able to refer the best examples but it's a good example of government reform which i know he supports. >> the prime minister and we can

be very proud of the fact in recent years we've reduced both the relative poverty and income inequality. we are a one nation party. so does he agree with lord rose, the leader of the remaining campaign that if we were to leave the eu and exercise greater control of immigration and public services that we would rise even further? >> i think what would happen if we were to leave the eu is we would see an impact on our economy that would be largely negative. that's not just my view, that's the view of the bank of england, the imf adequate number of international bodies. i would say to anyone who wants to make this choice is the choice for the british people the choice to make but we have to be clear about the economic consequences. >> in 1972, nine months married and six was pregnant with her first child, my constituent susan received a knock on the

door to say her husband had been killed in action in northern ireland. yet when susan married, she lost all compensation for her and her daughter, and still has no compensation for having made that huge sacrifice to a disgrace the way to treat those of lost loved ones serving our country. with the prime minister meet with me and her to discuss this case and the injustice that still face several hundred war widows in this country? >> i will make sure that susan gets immediate attention that she deserves. i know my right honorable friend the minister for defense personal veterans met with the association early to put forward the case. it was this government that did make the historic change so the war widows to remarry from april 1, 2015, would retain their war widows pension. i was a change long as for a delivered under this government. we will look at this issue but at the moment we are of the view

the long-standing policy of successive governments that we should not make these changes and apply them retrospectively. >> thank you, mr. speaker. yesterday the fourth affairs select committee start our inquiry. this afternoon i have a debate, despite all the detentions that exist between our two countries will the prime minister it was assured he will redouble his efforts to try to lower tensions for the follow permanent member of the council? >> of course we want to keep tensions low and, of course, we want to have good relations but we cannot ignore the fact that russian backed undirected separatists have effectively tried to redraw the boundaries of europe. and when we consider how dangerous exercises like i've been in the past we have to take it extremely serious in the present. [shouting]

>> can i thank the prime minister for joining the rest of the planet in congratulating the football club on the brilliant and historic success? during this amazing season the local hero gary, thought the idea was so far-fetched is that if they did when he would present match of the day in his underwear. [shouting] >> don't join him. >> as a supporter -- does he agree that politics as well as in football when you make a promise, you should keep it? >> i absolutely agree. i have been watching -- [laughter] everything kerry has said since he's not quite answering the question can something of course

no one ever gets away with in this house. so i welcome what he says. obviously, i hope it's just the start of them joining the blue team. [shouting] >> order. >> light coverage on c-span2 gets underway at 7 a.m. eastern. you can watch it on the nights right here on c-span. president obama is in front -- flint michigan meeting right now ath residents dealing with water contamination crisis. --expected to deliver marks deliver remarks. here is more of the president's

visit from today. this visit? egan: the flatr. supply -- the flint water supply with lead is the main reason. what he said prompted his visit was a letter he received from an whot-year-old flint girl wrote telling him about the problems with the drinking water . the president said he told the young girl that he wants her and ther residents to know federal government is going to look after this problem. there is a lot of frustration in , and how quick and complete the response has been so far. who holds responsibility for water issue in a state? is it primarily the state's role and not the federal government's role?

mr. egan: this was a state issue , even the governor appointed a tax -- a task force which put most of the responsibility on michigan department of environmental quality which handles drinking water's possibilities. it is even accentuated more in this case because in this case the city which has responsibility for drinking water was under the control of the state manager because flint was in such bad financial shape, the state had basically put the city in receivership and basically in charge of the city in time of this contamination happening. host: who will the president be meeting with? mr. egan: he will be meeting with governor snyder. he will be meeting with the mayor of flint, karen weaver. state, be briefed by the local and federal officials to

hold a meeting with flint residents and speak to about 1000 people at northwestern high school in flint. with the young girl that wrote in the letter. childis a three-year-old who has become a part of the face of this crisis which was featured on the cover of time magazine in january. his name is sincere smith. him and his mother has been -- ham and his mother have been invited to the high school. host: c-span will be covering the president's visit live at 3:55 p.m. eastern time for our viewers who want to listen to what he has to say. what is the president hoping to a cop as? egan: it is not clear in terms of immediate action. it is a symbolic visit to show that the president cares.

he is putting pressure on congress. there is bills before congress that would provide over 200 million nationwide to address for structure problems. about $100 million could go to the city of flint to replace lead service lines. he is behind that legislation and republicanc members of congress from michigan are backing. he will like to get that through. host: >> michigan senator danny -- debbie stabenow offered a she was pleased that the president had made a commitment to the families of flint. "he has worked so closely with

me and families to bring relief tothe families that continue be affected by the water crisis." the president speech gets underway at 4 p.m. eastern here on c-span. governor john kasich announcing this afternoon that he is dropping out of the presidential race. we will bring that live to you at 5 p.m. eastern and open the phone lines to get your reaction. right now, a segment from "the washington journal close with former presidential candidate ralph nader. we are back with consumer advocate and green party independent presidential candidate ralph nader. campaign 2016h and the results from the primaries last night. ,ernie sanders gets another win but then when you look at the the math still doesn't add up for the vermont independent senator. she has got super delegates

almost to the number that she needs of 23 guest: -- who will be the democrat nominee? guest: we don't know what scandals will the fall hillary clinton. you have the e-mail situation. so that is still up in the air. the big story in the campaign is bernie sanders. he has proved you can raise a lot of money with small denominations. that is a big breakthrough. it challenges the myth that you have to go to multimillionaire funding parties and super pac's. he made a great contribution. the national polls are showing high polls inry terms of character, personality, consistency, clean politics. you never know.

i think he is very important. he doesn't quit before california. i think he can help the democrats recover congress. i think that is his role. i don't think his role is to shout her raw for hillary -- for hillary but he can go around the country getting congressional democratic congress. host: what will he ask for at the convention? caller: he will get a primetime spot but he will ask for a $15 an hour minimum wage, universal health insurance, breaking up the big banks. he is not going to get anything. once the vanquished goes to the convention, they are really vanquished and they just get in line, shut up, and praise the nominee. but i don't think he is going to do that.

he can go all over the country supporting democratic candidates for election and he is likely to lend his credibility to hillary's in credibility. ant: so should he launch independent bid? guest: it is too late. makes sure you have to climb mountains to get on the presidential debates. so he is fighting from within the democratic party. host: are you saying that from your experience? guest: i am the recordholder of documenting the two-party , restricting the choices for the american voter. own all thehey voters and everybody said shut up and get online but the greatest changes in our country were launched by third parties. the liberty party against slavery, labor farmer parties, we should remember that. new ideas and fresh

directions for justice were always launched by small parties. what separates bernie sanders and hillary clinton? she says they are not that different. guest: the thing about hillary is you have her record. -- as a relative rest militarist. the new york times is endorsing hillary and still having a page hillary the hawk. she scares obama. she scares some of the generals. war is the first choice and look at the libya attack, which was a violences, chaos and spilling into africa. that was her war. she countered the secretary of defense who was opposed to it. you can topple a dictator. what next?

she wasn't ready. host: how do you know she scares president obama. has criticized him for being soft in syria. she wanted more troops over there. and she is a corporatist. she's for wall street. if you tabulate wall street people, she is there first choice. donald trump is too temperamental, too egotistical. they want something that is predictable. i want to show you what she had to say in athens, ohio. that she madeents about coal companies, she has been holding events to talk miners,nor -- steelworkers. honor our got to obligations to minors past and

present and stand with the steelworkers. ths, ionths, -- for mon have been speaking out against coal companies like patriot and shirky that have tried to their responsibilities to workers and retirees. minors, power plant workers, and railroad employees deserve the benefits that they have earned. your reaction to hearing her speak that way? guest: i think she was right in the coal industry is coming to an end, it has to. it is dirty, harmful, we work to treatment, tens of thousands of miners have left widows and orphans due to dirty,

unsafe businesses for the environment, for the waterways. we have got to replace it with solar energy, wind power, solar thermal, efficiency, we know how to do it. more homes are putting solar panels up. it is a job intensive industry. they move into renewable energy work, which they can be proud of and don't have to die from. host: what has senator bernie sanders done to the democratic party in his campaign and to the progressive movement. guest: he has basically shown that you can have a very progressive agenda and actually win the nomination, had it not been for closed primaries. he would have won if the independent voters could have voted a few days ago in

pennsylvania, connecticut, delaware. these are states he would have won if the independent voters could have voted. he won rhode island because it wasn't them -- because it was an open primary. somebody who calls himself a democratic socialist coming up that fast, he started at 3%. what does he do next? what he has to do is lead a civic movement. rally got to have a big on the mall and he is going to take his agenda and say we want to press all the candidates from national to local to turn this country in the right direction of fair play and sustainable productivity. if he does that, he will be relatively independent. he won't be seen as a toady following clinton if she wins. he has a lot of agonizing decisions to make but he has a

and very of support high in the polls. host: are you giving him advice? guest: i just wrote a column that says bernie sanders has gone a long way without other people's advice. he hasn't returned a call in 17 years. it is on the screen. we will show that column there and the new book that is coming out why ralph nader. we will talk about that, breaking through power. website, youtheir can find more details about the book and the events. let's go to baltimore -- go to new york. caller: it is a pleasure having a direct chat with mr. nader who has been my role model for life.